It’s probably fair to say that the voters of Scotland have been feeling a little put-upon lately. In the last decade they’ve been sent to polling stations on no fewer than 12 occasions (Holyrood elections in 2011 and 2016, UK elections in 2010, 2015 and 2017, council elections in 2012 and 2017, European elections in 2009 and 2014, and finally referendums on AV, independence and the EU).

And they’ve been subjected to endless weeks, months or even years of campaigning and haranguing each time. One woman – who only had to endure nine of those 12 – had famously had enough of it.

Yet Scots face possibly three more in the next 12 months or so, if various factions get their way, taking the total to 15 major votes in a decade. And if we want to secure the desired outcome in any of them, we’re going to have to ease the load on folk a bit.

Because it’s hard enough making your mind up on one big issue without complicating it with lots of others at the same time. And the publication of the Growth Commission report has sent Scottish politics geeks into another frenzy of not just debating whether independence should happen, but what it could/should/would look like when it did.

It was triggered by several things, but the lightbulb went on at this tweet:

And given how much of the last couple of weeks we’ve spent analysing poll data, we couldn’t help running some numbers through our head. Because contained in that single attractive-sounding tweet is an almost-certain second defeat for independence.

And since the Venn diagram of those three groups of people is NOT a set of concentric circles – lots of Trident backers voted Remain, lots of Labour and SNP voters voted Leave, etc etc – that means it adds up to more than 50%.

In other words, that solitary tweet manages to tell a clear majority of Scottish voters that independence means something big happening that they don’t want.

And that means that right there and then, before anything else happens, we’ve lost.

Because every extra weight you load onto the simple principle that Scotland should get the governments it votes for is one more water bottle or pan or shovel on the back of the Buckaroo mule. Sooner or later you hit a trigger point where you’ve pushed too many people away with one thing or another.

Add those three to the previous three (never mind all the other lesser things that might still be the last straw for some people) and it becomes impossible to even theoretically IMAGINE a plausible alliance for Yes, because you can’t just force everyone to think like you about everything – you have to convince the electorate that actually exists.

If you tell voters that “independence means no Trident, no Queen, more tax, more immigration and staying in the EU, all from one single vote”, you haven’t a snowball’s chance of ever getting more than half of Scots to go along with it. The arithmetic just doesn’t work. No one of them is too heavy by itself, but you cannot get all those weights onto the mule at once without losing the game.

If, however, you tell people the truth – that independence simply means getting to decide on all of those things separately for ourselves at the appropriate time, and that they might still be able to live in an independent Scotland they actually like the look of – you might just convince them.

It doesn’t mean conceding any of those points. It ISN’T saying “we won’t change anything, so there’s no point even being independent”. It’s saying that an independent Scotland will be like every other country on Earth and decide its politics as it goes along, not all on one day. You’ll get the chance to argue for everything you believe in. All you’re voting for in a referendum is the ability to make those choices.

(The absolute stupidest constitutional argument of all is “Wah wah wah independence in the EU isn’t independence so it’s not worth bothering because you’re just swapping London rule for Brussels rule”. The EU doesn’t set the UK’s income tax rate. It doesn’t impose Trident on us. It doesn’t decide whether we have a queen or not. It doesn’t force Tory governments on us because Germany voted for them. And unlike the UK, if Scotland decides in the future that EU membership isn’t working out we can leave the EU any time we want. The EU doesn’t tell you that you can’t even have a referendum because “now is not the time”. If you want out, the EU’s exit door is always open.)

The electorate is already close to the end of its tether so far as being asked to vote on stuff goes. If we lose another indyref we really will have exhausted their patience for a generation. The steadily-growing rage of MB Games’ long-burdened beast over the years tell its own story.

So we really, really can’t afford to mess around this time. We’ve had our practice run. We’re only arguing for one simple, logical, sensible, reasonable thing – that Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments. In the months to come, let’s make sure people know exactly what it is that we’re selling them.

429 to “The Buckaroo Principle”

The YES movement have been led to believe that Autumn 2018 is when the announcement on Indyref will be made.

My ideal is an election manifesto that seeks a mandate from the sovereign people of Scotland that the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Govt shall be the representatives of the sovereign people of Scotland. When they are mandated as the representatives of the sovereign people, we can then take it from there.

The 1707 Union would be dead. Would that mean independence? Depends what you call independence. What many call independence, I call sovereignty. Many believe you can be independent whilst in a union. I think that’s a contradiction in terms. My view is that we can retain ultimate sovereignty and have a union or unions if the sovereign people choose them but, any union involves a surrender or sharing of “some” sovereignty. Those pros and cons would need to be weighed up at the time.

However, in this 1707 Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland we are subjugated, disrespected and disenfranchised of democracy. We are told UK Parliament is sovereign in this Union. We don’t share sovereignty, we have no effective means of exercising ANY political sovereignty. The UK EU-ref and use of UK-exit from the EU to completely betray the devolution agreement has confirmed that.

The people of Scotland are sovereign. It’s time for the people of Scotland to show that and take back control from UK Parliament.

When we can exercise our political sovereignty, that’s when we can decide about all the other issues, such as who do we want running our government and what policies do we want that government to follow.

I do of course think Scotland could do many things differently *if we win the right to choose* but I do not see independence as a chance to impose things upon people tyrannously.

You also run the risk when you attach these things on of people arguing about ‘what it said on the ballot paper’.

It’s a virtue to be able to say ‘the only thing you are being asked to decide is whether you agree with the concept of Scotland making its own decisions. None of the decisions have been made yet and won’t be without the general public’s consent’.

“Friends,
Confidence in the independence case is growing.
So as we wait for the fog of Brexit to clear, our opportunity – indeed, our responsibility – is this.
Not just to focus on the “when” of independence.
But to use our energy and passion to persuade those who still ask “why?”
Right now, that is the more important task.
And, if we do that, let me tell you this –
I am more certain than ever before that persuading a majority of our fellow citizens that Scotland should be an independent country is well within our grasp.”

As you rightly say Stuart, we need to focus on the one message. Scotland deserves the right to its own democracy and to make its own decisions. That’s it.

And as an addendum, ‘then we the general public/residents of Scotland have chosen a course with regard to a particular issue (after independence), they will find for the first time that there is no Westminster government (backed by voters in the rUK) to say ‘well, you can’t’.

We lost the 2014 vote because many people saw it as a vote for the SNP and SNP policies. The biggest mistake the SNP made was not to disavow people of this notion and the White paper might as well have been a SNP manifesto

Whilst the SNP and Greens got the mandate in the Scottsh parliament for Indyref2 it must be run by a non-partisan group with a popular but non partisan leader and the SNP and Sturgeon must take a back seat otherwise we will never win

“We’re only arguing for one simple, logical, sensible, reasonable thing – that Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments.”
Not rocket science is it? That’s why, however, those parties opposed to Independence will continue to muddy the waters with endless talk about currencies and costs, because that is how you sow the seeds of confusion and doubt. If the majority of voters understood the simple principle of self-determination, we would already be an Independent country.

Ask yourself, deep in your heart, would you still want Independence if Scotland elected a Tory government?
I would feel sick to my stomach – and I don’t believe it would happen – but I would still vote for Independence because the people of Scotland would get what they alone voted for.

I think it was certainly right to fire peoples’ imaginations and, remember, Yes support rocketed during the campaign and so I think they did more right than the No campaign.

This said, I would stick to trying to show how Scotland could build the institutions of a state quickly in the event of indy (showing that it’s not some sort of ‘chaos’ to follow). This is more ‘neutral’ in tone and would show that Scotland could function just like any other state.

I think there are concrete signs that some of this is happening already (ideas for national bank, energy companies, Jeane Freeman’s work in getting the Social Security body ready etc). So the groundwork is being put in place IMHO.

The monarchy for many people is just there so they accept it, Trident is there somewhere but doesn’t impact on their daily lives, the SG keeps the spectre of the Tories at, at least, some distance by mitigating and openly opposing their policies.

The sad out outcome of voting not to have independence would be the voters who might be put off by highlighting monarchy, Trident and Tories, will lose many things that really, really do impact their daily lives and their future.

I agree with this 100%. I have heard some crazy arguments over the years, such as “but they (SNP) want to keep the Queen” as if that somehow made staying in the UK a more progressive option. It’s about democracy. Once we’re independent, we can choose whatever policies we want.

To anyone saying “what is the point of independence if we’re going to [insert personal gripe here]”, the appropriate response is to replace the word “independence” with “democracy” because that is what we are literally talking about.

Personally I think the answer to the monarchy is to insist Scotland gets the monarchy it’s meant to have had since 1320

No ditching a sovereign overlord or the Parliament which claims to have usurped the Divine Right of Kings. Simply an assertion that in Scotland we are Sovereign.

If there’s no movement towards celebrating the Declaration of Arbroath in 2020 given it’s significance as a statement of the sovereignty of the people then that’s probably because we’ll still be in the UK.

It’d be interesting to see how it gets portrayed if it’s not completely ignored. Probably some kind of variation of the Westminster sovereignty grab although much earlier and more primitive due to not being English.

Regardless of which loyalty to a monarch in Scotland is to our Head of State and not personal. There’s an ambivalence about the Orange Order and NI “Loyalism” in that context.

Long story short, keep the monarch but as intended in our declaration of independence. According to our laws is what Liz said when being crowned.

The other options are an overpowered President blundering about or a May like would be tyrant.

Keep the Unicorn in it’s chain but hang on to the other end and don’t forget who’s the boss.

I’ve always been firmly in the yes camp but I would consider myself centre-right and support an exit from the EU and while I agree that Scotland needs to attract immigrants I do support a points based immigration system like Canada / Australia.

While nothing would sway my opinion on independence I do understand why people who are between yes and no could be pushed to No by the staunch pro EU / pro immigration / forever left government message from the Yes side.

“Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments.”

You know what else I don’t understand? Those yessers who want Brexit but want Brexit to happen before the next indyref. Eh? What’s that all about? “I don’t want voters in the rest of the UK making decisions for Scotland, except the decision on leaving the EU, that’s OK, they get to decide that, Scotland’s democratic wishes can be ignored on that one.”

This is a good post but does not go far enough. In essence, the independence argument needs to be de-politicised completely. Independence is a principle, not a political argument. And principles are above politics.

Why is independence a principle? Because politics is defined by a left to right spectrum of views and anything that cannot be positioned on that spectrum meaningfully is apolitical, by definition. In other words, if there’s no plausible and clear reason to associate a viewpoint to the left, right, or centre of politics, then it is not politics.

Is democracy a political argument? Is opposition to racism political? Of course, I could go on citing such examples. And like all such examples, independence hinges on principle, not politics. Thus, there is no reason for someone on the left to be any more pro-independence than someone on the right.

The problem, of course, is that independence in Scotland has become associated with — not just the left — the radical left. Follow it through; there’s a reason that parties on the radical left in Scotland and elsewhere are dead. The majority of people simply don’t want those people and those ideas impacting on their lives.

If there is one simple response to people like Loki, Cat, and the so-called radical left, that should immediately result in them shutting their faces, it is the argument above — radical left politics and the parties who espouse them are essentially non-existent in Scottish politics.

When Nicola reminds people that Sterling is as much Scotland’s as it’s the UK’s she could be pointing out our stake in the currency issuer backing Sterling.

Westminster might not want to share, just as the don’t want to join the Euro. The question is what would they give to buy Scotland out? If the don’t do we get a seat on the board? More direct influence on interest rates than now.

First and foremost we must give belief that Scotland can manage on its own. That is the priority. Big decisions will have to be made after indy, but that is normal in any country.

I think you have got this exactly right Rev. Too much, too soon from too many interest groups, detracts from or complicates the prime message of independence. The message that we can stand on our own two feet must be prime.

Agreed, ain’t got nothing against alternative voters and supporters of previous polls, it was their choice to do as they understood things and more and more of the People of Scotland are now learning from past events (and finding out the hard way.)

Again, nothing against our People… it’s only ever the British Nationalist POLITICIANS and the MSM that should receive the necessary grilling.

If we, and we on here at least most certainly do, want independence then that is what we must focus. All the Britnat shite about currency, Trident, Queenie, EU etc are all topics that can be resolved AFTER we are an independent country once again.

First and foremost we must become that independent country we want. During the transition period from subjugated country to independent country would be the time to start discussing all the other stuff like currency, Trident, Queenie etc. in my view.

If there was one thing that we do need to start discussing during the transition period first it would be currency. The new report says 10 years is quite sufficient time period for transfer from the pound to a Scottish currency. Like many I totally disagree. I believe we need shot of the pound in fairly short order. If Estonia, Lithuania, Czech republic, Slovakia and others can ditch their old currencies for their new currencies after independence within 9 – 20 months of gaining independence then surely an independent Scotland can achieve something similar. When this decision is made I sincerely hope our new currency is not called the pound or Scottish pound anything but that. To do this would, retain too much of the English/British pound connotations about it. For me a completely different name must be chosen … something like the Ryal would be my personal choice.

Not everyone wants all of them. It is not a package. It is either – or. One doesn’t depend on another.

The tweet is one person’s preference. No one get’s a complete package. It is a compromise. To get better control. Ultimately Independence.

The carry on about currency? The Irish Free State kept the £ from 1923 till 1928. Then introduced their own currency the Punt, pegged to the £. Joined the Euro 1999. They had the most growth ever. Celtic tiger. IR has better pensions and benefits. A successful economy. NI is a subsidised basketcase. Years out of date.

I totally agree. People are complex and the Venn diagram is an apt model to use. It is also why the SiU types get so frustrated with the Scottish electorate returning the SNP. They also fail to appreciate that a bundle of things are happening when that tick gets placed. They have tried to oust the SNP by making Scottish politics a single issue topic and focusing on one messiah for that negative No Surrender message. That is ultimately political nihilism and will come back to bite them.

I have warmed to the “big enough, rich enough and smart enough” message. It should be the core of our next campaign. This doesn’t cross over anyone’s Venn circles and allows an independent Scotland to deal with those issues as any mature democracy should through competing policies and the ballot box.

By comparison Tory voters have things easy. They get all the individual policies they want served up on a plate without ever having to worry about securing the support of a majority of voters. In fact they can even get the government they want without winning a single Westminster seat. Easy to see then why Tory voters like things just the way they are.

Independence means that Scots alone decide matters, they are responsible for their own destiny and their own ‘mistakes’.
Given the dependency mindset that grips many of our citizens that is just enough to scare them into voting a big no.
Dependency is the problem, plus that peculiar Scots distrust of one another.
Unionism has done a good job. In our case what passes for ‘democracy’ may be a destructive addiction to sticking with ‘nurse’.
Unless of course the SNP really gets stuck in and takes a chainsaw to the whole rotten underpinnings of the status quo and its reactionary, anglocentric mythology.

Great article, this is why I’ve always been reluctant to be enthusiastic about the Yes movements prevailing sentiment of typically left leaning idealism. The whole thing of “independence means we’re free of the tories forever” is just wishful thinking from die hard socialists who want their vision of independence to be the *only* vision of independence. And remarkably, in my experience, they can’t comprehend that that vision is not likely to be shared by everyone.

The all under one banner marches recently have been a resounding success, and before them the various gatherings at George Square in Glasgow etc, but the fact of the matter is that at these events there tends to be an overwhelming tendancy for them to be overtly espousing various policies over and above simply independence. You just need to look around at various banners on these marches to see things like “Tory scum out” or even the famous “bairns not bombs”. It’s then not about independence, its about a raft of things that those people want, not just Indy.

I personally view these kind of things with the same distrust and apprehension I felt when various lefties and right on types formed RISE in the aftermath of the first Indy ref. It just cemented to me the view in the general populations mind that indy is the purview of radical left types instead of a principle which overrides left/right politics. Has anyone asked themselves how a group of Tories wanting to go on one of these marches would be received? I doubt they’d feel welcomed. But they should be. If we genuinely want Indy we’ll need support of those we may not agree with politically.

Indeed only yesterday I saw an Indy supporter on Twitter tell a recently converted unionist who had mentioned they found being a unionist easier that they should “go back to being a Yoon”. That kind of thinking just boggles my mind. Never mind the fact that if they stopped and thought about it they’d realise they were making a valid point, being a unionist is in many ways easier, more comfortable, but they’d just thrown her new found support for their cause back in their face. Bizarre behaviour. Thankfully Stu and others chastised them swiftly and they offered apologies, but that kind of reaction is too typical of some Indy supporters.

I mean personally I’d be open to a Conservative government in an independent Scotland, if they curbed some of the more swivel eyed tendencies of the UK party that is. Hell, if they had a good enough manifesto I’d maybe even vote for them. But even saying that on here, after everything I’ve just said I’m fully expecting to be called some sort of undercover yoon. I’m not but we’ll see how it goes!

This post is just what I have always thought. Keep it to basic principles. That’s why I will not be reading the growth paper.

The UK Union has been and is bad for Scotland. Scotland has been treated like a colony and not the equal partner as per the Treaty of Union.

Scotland is a country and we should be taking our own decisions like any normal country. Advocating your country is controlled by another country is abnormal and an abdication of responsibility. The majority of richest countries per head of population are small countries.

It always baffles me how different interests argue endlessly tooth and nail on issues, become entrenched and slogans like “no surrender” or “to the death” become the millstones around necks that they are.

I believe “we”, the Scottish people, are fundamentally different from the majority of our cousins in the south, in that we may differ in our opinions, but we are certain of one thing, we all want what’s best for Scotland. And in that we are united. (possibly nearly the only thing :-))

Let’s get independent, then we can look forward to those discussions, but independence must come first!!

– isn’t it depressing to keep having to STATE THE OBVIOUS every 5 minutes or so?

The biggest vote losers are with the electoral poison of the identity politics brigade – if you let them establish themselves as a “revolutionary vanguard” / “leaders” of the independence movement – and start spouting pish on major TV, encouraged by the broadcasters – that new Scotland will automatically be some kind of “every progressive policy ever cooked up” – from day 1 – then the whole project is dead in the water.

Which is exactly the plan, exactly how the “old” left got destroyed and exactly why they will get free reign from the media. They are the “leftwing” of neoliberalism and of the establishment, nothing more – most of them simply useful idiots.

Elementary statistics. The conjunction of any two probabilities is always less than the probability of either alone. If there is a 50% chance that you support independence and a 50% chance that you want a republic, both together is .5 x .5 =25% chance of you supporting Yes.

So let’s stick to the simple question: who should govern Scotland – we Scots for our own aims, whatever they might be, or somebody else for theirs, whatever they might be?

I’ve been getting annoyed at folks who support Indy with conditions and caveats. “I’ll only vote YES if iScotland does/has this/that/other”. Or even less aggressively, setting out detailed personal visions of iScotland knowing some of their aspirations are not mainstream.

Anyway, what is mainstream, when multiple issues are considered together? Very little!

FFS. Most of my life my country has been ruled by another country’s government which we did not choose, we did not vote for. I want that to end. I want to live in a democracy.

I want a democratically elected government in this country with all the powers of a normal European state. Through referendums or elected representation I want the people of Scotland to make the decisions on austerity, EU, WMDs, war and peace, the currency we use, the tax we pay, the services we receive, etc etc..

I may not like all the decisions, and may disagree with some policies, but I will accept them because they will represent the majority views of my fellow country men and women. They will not have been forced upon us by others against our wishes.

That is what Indy is all about! No conditions, no caveats!

The Rev is absolutely right – full unshackled self determination and nothing else is what we need to be promoting.

“You know what else I don’t understand? Those yessers who want Brexit but want Brexit to happen before the next indyref.”

I agree it seems a bit odd, but it’s not entirely stupid. If Scotland is dragged out by Brexit an independent Scotland gets to decide which bits we want in future by signing up to them rather than fighting the sort of entirely destructive rearguard withdrawal that is Brexit.

I genuinely find it hard sometimes to determine what is Left and Right in our current Party system. We are often told Independence is not radical or bold enough and the SNP are too timid, indeed I have made that claim over some of their policies.

All the abstaining and trying to outfox the SNP by the Labour Party, North and South, means that Socialism is way down their agenda. The idea that Corbyn will rescue Scotland from its left of centre path for a few years is ridiculous. As Labour accuses the SNP of stealing their policies all the time, why would Scotland need to be rescued?

But of course, they need Scottish seats to impose a Labour government on England, don’t they? When will England wake up?

I’ve been saying that since before 2014. I can hear myself saying the words.

Its not about currency, but who decides what currency you use.
Its not about Trident, its who decides if you have Trident….

It wasn’t just me saying it, there were others, but nobody was listening back then. They weren’t listening about the BBC either, – but that’s another story.

Having the last word on something requires Sovereignty, and Sovereignty IS Independence. If you are Sovereign, you ALWAYS get to play the last Top Trump card on the pile, because that is what being Sovereign MEANS.

Take Europe for example, the BritNats might whine and whinge about Europe stealing their sovereignty while they slept, but be in NO DOUBT that is complete bollocks. There is NO power held by Europe over the UK which was stolen or coersed from the UK but those powers to which the UK did not voluntarily concede by agreement. NEVER, at any point was there even a modicum of Sovereignty surrendered.

The UK, from the moment it entered the EEC until it voted for Brexit was Sovereign throughout, and if it didn’t agree with Europe, it could have exercised it’s pristine Sovereign right to leave at any time, even without a Brexit Referendum. Sovereignty, the choice to leave which nobody can overturn, is/was the UK’s Top Trump card, and when it was played Europe could not overrule it.

We Scots however, like to assert that we are Sovereign, but the vast majority of us have precious little understanding of what that means. We like to dress up in the clothes of sovereignty, but we don’t defend sovereign principle.

Westminster could have made a sovereign decision to leave Europe without a Referendum, because contrary to popular belief and prevailing wisdom, Democracy is not the Superior of Sovereignty, nor is it the precursor to being Sovereign.

If we, the people of Scotland, are indeed Sovereign, we do not require ANY Democratic mandate to lay claim to that Sovereignty. It is an absolute. It is binary. It is black, or it is white. We are Sovereign, or we are not. There are no degrees of Sovereignty, no grey shades between black or white.

That’s been my own personal “Buckaroo” moment. We are making a grave error in our strategy when we obfuscate the ownership of OUR Sovereignty with a modern democratic decision on how to weild it.

Not only do I now think an IndyREF is unnecessary, but I actually think binding our Sovereign emancipation from the Union to a democratic majority does a grave disservice to our sacred Constitutional Sovereignty. We do not have to buy back, nor win in a raffle or a ballot, that which we already own.

If we are Sovereign, we need do NOTHING except be Sovereign, because the Union with England cannot co-exist beside the ascendent principle of Scottish Sovereignty. If one condition exists, the other by very definition, cannot.

Screw Trident. Screw Currency. Screw the BBC. Screw Propaganda. Screw Europe. Screw Westminster. Screw Holyrood. Put all of this ‘noise’ out of your head. None of it is essential to the Constitutional issue of sovereign power. IF Scotland can make a legitimate claim to be Sovereign, then neither England, Westminster, Europe, Brussells or ANYBODY else can overrule us.

It breaks my heart with saddness, anxiety, and fear, but the most accurate and dangerously definitive question to put on this mythical IndyRef2 ballot is the question “Should Scotland abandon for all time its Constitutional claim to be Sovereign?”

Scary question eh? But like it or not people of Scotland, that’s the status quo we are currently living in. We are playing at sovereignty, just as a child might dress up in a cloak and a paper crown and call themselves a monarch.

IF we are Sovereign, then we need to man up and start acting like it. We don’t ask people to recognise our Sovereignty, we tell them to.

Yes, yes, yes, I know and fully accept we have a bona fide Constitutional dilemma about how we govern ourselves as a democracy of Sovereign citizens, – we need to come up with original and inventive devices and instruments to make our Constitutional Sovereignty functional, but that comes later. Let us not muddle up that Democratic implimentation of our Sovereignty-made-safe, with a “loose cannon” Democratic mandate from an unnecessary IndyREF poll which becomes a free floating particle unattached to any sovereign source empowerment.

Tough love Scotland? We laugh at the BritNats delusional fantasies about Brexit, and equally delusional nostalgia about Empire. But we’re not so different, we think our Democracy will deliver a “Soft” Indy, and we are harking back to the days when Scotland didn’t have an Empire but basked in sovereign recognition.

In the Army regulations, weapons drill for stripping a rifle or machine gun always starts with “take command of the weapon”. Its a dangerous indescriminate thing that can kill people. You need to be firm, confident and assured.

It is clear to see why so many of usual UKOK hacks attack you and try to undermine your credibility as a serious source of information…..because you actually DO the job that they regularly FAIL to do….end of.

However, I suspect what stresses a lot people out is the decision making process over the weeks before hand. This is probably particularly true of referendums.

If there is a vote next week I will vote SNP, Yes, or Remain. I have done all my decision making. That isn’t true for a lot of folks. It can be a hard decision for them and they know they may have to live with the consequences, especially if they change their mind down the line.

Two things make these more decisions difficult.

Firstly, they are having a habit of being indecisive! EURef had an ill defined option for which there was no planning. IndyRef1 was been destroyed by broken promises. No firm decisions resulted in either.

Secondly, the voters are being badly served by biased media. Legacy media is certainly no longer the goto place for information for most people, one way or another.

If only people had the ability to Digest and retain information like robots then use it to make correct decisions we’d be independent already..but they don’t so we have to rely on human fallible brains filled with emotion, bias, bigotry and all the other faults mankind is loaded with and that makes life complicated

On our national TV screens some of our population watched jaws dropped to idiot folk who were discussing Brexit in terms of the possibility of it being about cutting down trees or cheese or something, or travel to Spain for their holidays becoming more awkward, and I say some of our population because many of our population probably never even noticed because like the folk on that TV show many people wouldn’t know Brexit from a crumbly Hob Nob, and in their minds why should they that’s *the governments* job, and if they get it wrong they’re the ones we blame because some political chancer like Boris Johnson or Nigel Farage will jump on the Telly with the help and support of the media and take advantage of the poor souls unwired brains for their own ends, power for the chancers and disruption from the media, everybody happy

Independence to make your own decisions for many people is something they would rather not have because if they do posses that responsibility then they could be held up to be blamed for it going wrong so they don’t want it…What follows is the disbelief that others who might be like themselves have any more ability than they do so best leave it to others

Confidence: Many people in Scotland have never had any yet are filled by the *who do they think they are* syndrome which was created by the Ruling country England as part of their Empire bulding strategy, remove a peoples confidence culture and language and you remove its drive and ambition then begin rebuilding your own replacement culture within that conquered country by rewarding some sections of the conquered with treats for being good children, a knighthood here some land there and you’r a winner, you’ve created a dependency afraid to jump one way or another either through fear of punishment or fear of no reward

My belief is that Nicola Sturgeons slower methodical path towards Independence, while unpalatable for the more impatient who would wish to make a fighting stand of it right now, will win by replacing the visible crumbling culture of the Empire as it is now with the original confidence that was ripped out of Scotland in the first place

The Unionists think they hate Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP, they don’t, they fear what they think is their own England based replacement culture dissapearing and I believe that’s the challenge the First Minister has set herself

Brilliant, forceful simplicity, right to the point as always: independence first, nation-shaping thereafter, according to what this nation decides it wants, issue by issue. The inevitable corollary, though, is that in the next campaign we have to make that point and keep making it, and at least counter if not override the inevitable torrent of scaremongering and doom that’ll be orchestrated from within as well as from London.

Perhaps the next article on clarifying important issues should be on euthanising the idea that a Holyrood election is a suitable platform for an independence mandate.
Firstly, you can’t make other parties agree on this format just because the SNP might want it. It’s a general election and that means all the issues are up for discussion. If the Blue/Red/Yellow Tories decide they don’t want it to be about independence then it won’t be and the SNP will look like mad people shouting at the traffic.
Secondly, GE’s are tribal. If we really think that many Labour supporters might support independence then a GE is the wrong time to think about testing this proposition. Even a split party will agree a common GE set of policies and the LP will not make independence one of them. They’re also not going to split just because the SNP have decided to force an independence GE.
Thirdly, if you give today’s article any credence then you’re going to confuse voters and give indy-hating journos a gift. The GE would get the one big question of independence mixed up with lots of smaller or even quite big ones like Trident, the monarchy etc. Every opinion poll for independence would get mixed up with those others on the state of the parties. GEs are bad enough these days for treating opinion polls as news…imagine a joint GE/indy election where the public are being asked to do something they’ve never had to do before and also have to try to amalgamate these heretofore separate issues and make a final decision in a way they’ve never had any experience of doing.
Fourthly, let’s imagine the separation talks go on for longer than expected or some unforeseen event occurs or just a plain old recession starts…if this started to approach the time of another GE then what would stop the unionist parties from arguing that this coming GE should be about remaining with the UK? The SNP don’t control the electoral cycle or the dates of GEs, so a first GE/indy election could just as easily be about the opposite four years later.
Anyway, the overall point stands that GEs cannot be made into something they’re not designed to be despite what Thatcher may have said decades ago. We’re stuck with a referendum and people should not waste any time discussing anything else.

There is a corollary to this sensible proposition; a vote for SNP is a means to an end but it is not the end. The SNP requires a detailed political manifesto to become elected during this period of devolution. However after independence there is no necessity to vote for the SNP. After independence you can vote for whichever party you want to run our country based on their Scotland specific party manifestoes be it real Scottish Tories or real Scottish Labour.
Lend your vote to the SNP even if you have to hold your nose to do it because the SNP manifesto does not necessarily show you what Scotland will be like after independence but the SNP is the only party that can get us there.

It is about one thing only. WHO gets to decide on Scotland’s future – London or Edinburgh. Everything else is peripheral to that key point. As the Rev have pointed out, all the minutiae is for after Indy, that’s why the Unionists continue to press the YES campaign for detail, when they don’t even now what a future UL would look like.

One simple message: Independence means SCOTLAND can choose its own future [NOT London]

Good article. Statements like the above tweet annoy me because they assume the whole Yes movement thinks like a hive mind. It’s no wonder unionists think we’re a cult when people like that excommunicate Yessers because they happen to be monarchists, or support Trident or are Tories. (Yes, independence-supporting Tories do exist! They may be a minority but they are there.)

I hate the Tories and everything they stand for but the Yes movement needs to seriously tone down the anti-Tory rhetoric. When and if Scotland becomes independent, it will have its own Conservative-voting segment of the population as it does now. These people, while I disagree with their views, deserve fair representation in an independent Scottish Parliament. We cant begin our new journey with independence by telling certain groups of people they are not welcome. That is not conducive to a healthy, democratic society.

Independence is about getting the governments we vote for. Everything else (the monarchy, taxes, immigration etc.) will be decided by the various governments Scots vote into office, regardless of their political hue.

I have often said that I think more Scottish Tories should support independence because it gives them a real chance to reform their party and gain power in an independent Scotland. Many people may not like it but I have no doubt an indy Scotland will have its own Conservative governments sometimes.

We need to be a broadchurch. Independence is the goal. The rest can be decided after the fact. And we’ll decide it together as a nation.

I now think it should be the Scottish Dollar, if it good enough for Australia, New Zeeland and Canada it is good enough for us to have the Scottish Dollar.
A lot of people think Pound and think England, that is my only reason for not having the Scottish Pound.

Within the constraints of the UK/Westminster colony domination, I think the SNP/SG is doing the right thing with getting on with building up the State of Scotland.

The infrastrucure, bridges, roads, housing, Scot.NHS, etc.
An Investment Bank that can easily be converted to a Scot. Central Bank.
Investment in education.
Long term investment/holdings in future projects such as Prestwick.
Shipbuilding – see Fregusons – not waiting for non-existent help coming from London.
Energy investment in renewables, wind, tidal.
Opening trade offices world-wide to promote Scottish produce/products or know-how.

All designed for Scotland to already be/act as an independent state.

Be confident in your own sovereignity and act like a SOVEREIGN nation.

Independence is a state of mind and voting for it in a referendum is just the ratification of it.

– naming names – the people who will get wheeled out as “voices for independence” on the major TV shows or given mainstream newspaper space

Angela Haggerty – er, the “Captain” … it’s journalism, Jim, but not as we know it …

Cat Boyd – funny, until you realise she means it – output generally like a child’s homework which has not been corrected

Jordan Daly – the Blanche Dubois of scottish journalism

Jonathon Shafi – our own Emmanuel Goldstein, SWP refugee and Moses to a new Tribe

Mike Small – the bella boy – a new Scotland will be like living in a Belle and Sebastian song, with cover art by Alasdair Gray

Loki – the pet “working class oik” currently beloved of the chattering classes – is it because of his “authenticity” or do they like his beats …

– anyone who writes like they are a TRY-OUT for the Guardian
– anyone who looks like they’d be better off moving to BRIGHTON

– that Wings is by FAR the biggest and best independence blog and yet almost no one ever “beats a path” to the Rev’s door – tells you all you need to know – he “talks sense, ken” – and that will not do.

The Rev was asking for possible alternatives to Buckaroo…humbly submit the “Jenga Principle”…too many players loading on too many unnecessary, contradictory policy ideas gives voters the impression that the ricketty structure (indyref2) has been built by cowboys…collapse is inevitable.
Loved today’s article…however, be warned, such a strong image might get nicked by the other side!

I agree we must avoid alienating any potential Yes voters with flag waving around aboliton of the Monarchy etc.

However, I would also add that there is another aspect to this …. for me a key strategy for winning Indyref II will be to keep some of the NO’s at home on the day.

To do this we must aviod arousing their passions over issues such as nuclear weapons and the future of Monarchy – issues that are extremely dear to the Unionists especially. (And I say that as a pacifist republican!)

Lacking a threat to the Crown or to the security of the realm and if it is raining), those dear old Unionists might just sigh and decide to put the kettle on rather than go to the Polls on the big day!

EVERY country should govern themselves. Scotland is a country and wanting Scotland to govern itself isn’t Nationism, it’s NORMAL. Not wanting Scotland to govern itself is not normal. Wanting Scotland ruled by another country deprives Scots of DEMOCRACY!
The question should frame the debate. The question should be a simple one that reflects reality. “Should Scotland be a normal self governing country or England’s colony?” The choice is democracy or subjugation. The choice is Democracy or Colony?

– BUT – this is something you might want to try, very carefully, maybe 10 years post independence. You would not try it on Day 1 – and certainly you would NOT put it into any kind of document like the Growth report. The Swiss are working from something that already works for them – and they have hundreds of years of experience of – and no doubt whatsoever, if it has problems, they will shut it down.

This may seem kinda-boring, but having a central banking system which is invigorating, facilitating, stable and sound, rather than an adversarial parasite living in your midst – the benefits are almost too great to properly explain.

Except we don’t get to set the agenda for debate the media does and our politicians are forced through media participation to adopt the agenda presented through a line of questioning.
In 2014 our main strength was our ground roots support and activities on the ground campaign yet its inadequate in todays day and age where media is truth through perception repetition lazy research and convincing soundbytes. Especially to the largest bloc voter group in Scotland the pensioners. If we don’t convince the over 55s we aint going to get over the line.
The TV couch potato’s who absorb a daily dose of BBC ITV SKY coupled with the Daily whatever in print all of which will tell them the exact same thing over and over and over.
So without a continuous sustained campaign of mainstream media debunking and discrediting it wont matter what message we try to put across it will simply be smothered under the very type of noise you want to avoid from our side of the argument.
This blog site is actually performing the very best examples of media debunking Ive ever come across anywhere its a pity you are only a single example when its this type of campaigning that’s needed in terms of Mainstream media proportions.
We should campaign by challenging the media on every single issue they print publish broadcast or promote build up the perception of an unreliable discredited reputation before they get the chance once again to hit us with vows promises fake stats figures claims scare stories and bribes.

Another example of the power the media has to influence the referendum result is through suppression of representation.
We’re seeing a prime example of it though the BBC news channels and programs like Question time where the agenda of Scottish Independence is simply ignored.
The First Minister of Scotland the day before her big conference is asked to talk about the Loch Ness Monster.
That’s a singular example of media suppression. Keeping MPs from the 3rd largest representative party in Westminster from Televised political debates is another.
It wont matter what our message is if we don’t have the means to deliver it.

Unfortunately, ideas that Sovereignty is really the most important thing won’t cut any ice with a significant portion of the electorate who will vote for Independence if they think they will be better off than in the Union.

Sovereignty is an intellectual thing which won’t persuade people who are materialistic.

This is why you need projections as to an Independent Scotland’s future wealth. Then, of course, you get problems with the Independence my way or not all crowd.

YES Rev, absolutely. I’ve been arguing this since the National Conversations back in 2007, when articles on the forums kept on putting policies with Independence, when there should indeed be NONE apart from Independence itself.

Every single policy has supporters and opposers, the more the policies, the more people oppose on the basis of what’s important for them.

…. 9 words. Sums everything up perfectly. A good mantra for campaigning.

I like that a lot too.

Think about it too, because it requires Unionists to defend Scotland’s Sovereignty in principle, Otherwise they not only to sell the concept of Union to people, but sell them a Union they can never voluntarily get out, of because it’s a Union where your democracy is an exercise in impotence, and can be legitimately ignored.

george wood says:
10 June, 2018 at 3:00 pm
Unfortunately, ideas that Sovereignty is really the most important thing won’t cut any ice with a significant portion of the electorate who will vote for Independence if they think they will be better off than in the Union.

Yes George, but then, it doesn’t have to.

We do not require a democratic majority for it, or against it. The same Sovereignty “made safe” would empower both decisions, making a NO majority as Sovereign as a YES majority, but enshrining the choice as a Sovereign choice home made in Scotland.

@Daisey Walker 2:22
Brilliant, though I hope that’s the Oslo Tiimes the adverts going into. At least the Norwegians have a more equitable society, are coping better with their “burden of oil” and seem oblivious for the need to bomb others and be a world power.

Reminds me of an absolutely ludicrous circular conversation I had with my sister in August 2014 which focussed on what colour the postboxes would be painted in an independent Scotland or even whether they’d continue to exisit at all. Her opinion was that they’d have to be blue, my position was that it didn’t fucking matter. In the last campaign everyone was far too busy arguing about the minutiae to look at the bigger picture. Independence first, then we’ll get round to painting postboxes when we get to it.

No, it’s some areshole from Brighton telling us not to encourage tourism to Skye, Loch Ness or Edinburgh, Well, I was on Skye just before the Bank Holiday, and it was busy but you could get around fine, I did. And I was in Edinburgh Wednesaday, even up Corstophine Road which was actually easier than last time about 20 years ago (it was a 2 lane M8 was the problem, I dived down to Bathgate and the A89 – big mistake). And Loch Ness is not nose to tail either, you can usually do 40 minimu, usually 50 and more if you know the road.

These ignorant arrogant dicks from other countries would really like to evict the natives from Scotland, and in our place have wolves, bears, lions and tigers and probably polar fucking bears as well. Maybe we could be fed to them as live prey.

I agree with others that this is a brilliant post by Rev Stu. I do hope Nicola reads it and takes it on board.

The Channel 4 news interview where Nicola could not remember some figure and was continually challenged to come up with an answer, is a very good demonstration of how we have again fallen into the trap of playing the game the Unionist way.

It most certainly is time to promote the message that once we are independent “it is you the voter who will choose what happens”.

This is such a positive thread and really opens up the conversations. Remember ‘Wheesht for Indy’ where it was claimed we were stifling debate to get Indy first? The last few weeks have blown that apart. Everything is up for debate, all the possibilities of what we could become.

The Growth Commission did a good thing – it refuted the idea that the SNP were afraid to confront the Unionist bogeymen about Scotland becoming independent. Seeing George Kerevan and Roger Mullin debating on Sunday Politics shows there are many opinions about the way the economy could be managed never mind social policy, defence, etc. That is the types of conversations we need to have with the doubters.

I agree we cannot fall into the trap of how much this will cost and that will cost based on the Unionist models and the status quo.

In the main people are feart of change, so they need to know that they can choose and have a say in how any change might impact their lives. Being tied to the rUK is holding Scotland back.

The Scottish government are already cushioning the terrible, cruel blows from the UKgov to the most vulnerable people, and with a UKgov who refuse to devolve powers that could further ‘better’ the lives of the most vulnerable, as well as progressing the economy. After decades of colonial rule, Scotland deserves and needs independence.

@Footsoldier
There was an article about that in the Herald yesterday, and strangely enough a Labour supporting decent poster, anti-Indy mostly, defended her on the basis politicians can’t always have these figures at their fingertips. So perhaps the human side equals the “I forgot” side. Politicians are human too. I’ve done the same by the way, some of these attacks on politicians are too partisan and apart from being wrong, don’t win over NO voters to YES, which is supposed to be the point of the whole thig.

Great Article Rev
That’s what its all about, thats what its always been about!

The Yes campaign has no business tryin to answer questions on currency ect..
The Yes campaign only has a responsibility to demonstrate the range of options available,to make its proposition work,and, now between the Growth Report and the work of Common Weal the information is right there for anyone who cares to look as to how their proposal could be done.
And the proposition IS that… The Treaty of the Union no longer works for Scotland,and we should vote to end it..

The Yes campaign have done everything asked of it and shown that there is a way forward for Scotland outside the UK Union arrangements,and done so in a great deal of detail!

Now that the People of Scotland have a demonstrably credible choice they will be using the mandate that they, in their wisdom,decided to give Holyrood to make such a choice.
The ,OPT OUT, Scotland gave itself!

Therefore
Now is the time for those who advocate the current UK Union arrangements to step forward and tell the Scottish people,what that offer is!
We need to know…What they believe,and Why?

Are they sayin that “this is as good as it gets”?
That THIS is the best possible deal for Scotland?
That Opt Outs aren’t real?

Can they explain why the Treaty agreement that puts “one of Scotland’s Government’s” in Westminster is still a good idea?

Can they show in what ways since 2014 when the Scottish people approved of the Treaty that they have been proven right to have done so ?

Do they still advocate tinkering around with the way the Treaty is working?
How many times do they believe the Treaty arrangements can be minipulated?
If this Treaty keeps having to be adjusted,can they still maintain that it’s any good?
What Exactly is so good about it that it should cost us the EU treaty arrangements?

As for the EU … Of course if that Union is a good one for Scotland of we would join it…
But that has very little to do with the UK Union being “the best deal possible”for the Governance of Scotland?

Anent the mediocre (at best) Sarah Smith & her daft questions, remember that her family had done extremely well out of this Union, her Maw continues to rake in cash from the House of Lords & she herself owes her position to the bed she was born in! The SNP conference is an affront to a Sarah Smith whose pater’s bones lie beside 48 Scottish kings, 8 Norwegian kings & 4 Irish kings! Hubris or whit?

A lot of the better together campaign was about giving people a reason to make them feel better for their “no” vote. ” I would have voted for indy but… ach that Alex Salmond…etc, so they could go to work the day after the vote and tell themselves that they had “done it for Scotland”. The establishment will be doing the same again, singling out supposed policies of an independent Scotland and inviting people to hang their “no” on whatever one they don’t like.
We absolutely must keep this about principle and not policy (or politics).

The big difference from 2014 is ‘President Salmond’. To many Nos the 2014 alternative to a livable with status quo was ThatAlickSalmond, a discredited White Paper and a majority SNP riding rampant over Scotland with no proper plans of how to reach the ‘sunny uplands’.

Now its Nicola with hers and others plans a plenty and the SNP in a minority; anything they want to do to us has to get past the Holyrood Parliament first. No longer are we being asked to buy a pig in a poke but this time, the chance to choose which pig

The Rev mentioned on Twitter that there had been a mini-fest in Bath with tickets priced at £160.In August 1970 I went to the Isle of Wight to see:- THE WHO/JETHRO TULL/TASTE (Rory Gallagher)/SLY & THE FAMILY STONE/THE DOORS/JONI MITCHELL/FREE/MILES DAVIS/LEONARD COHEN….oh and JIMI HENDRIX

My vote for Independence is to give future generations the right to shape Scotland.
What they do with that right is of secondary importance.

What I do know is that they will live in a society THEY created and not one thrust upon them.
The policies that impact their daily life will be what the majority living in Scotland voted for and not what the South of England residents voted for.

…so focus on the right to be a nation and stop pushing conditions linked to your vote. If you think the vote is for more radical environmental polices or left wing dogma then you are missing the point.

Vote YES for an unconditional gift to future generations of Scots to decide their future. As with any gift it will thereafter belong to them to use as they choose. The gift to your child of a car on the condition that they can only go where you want to go is not that appealing!!!

I’ve always thought like this as without Independence there is no option to change any policy. It really is that simple.

If we want to do things differently from what Westminster dictate we should do then we need all the powers not just devolution.

The way I see it is that those powers that are currently devolved and under the control of a Scottish government in Holyrood are used to benefit many more of the population than we would have if nothing was devolved.

Independence means everything is “devolved” every area of our lives will be under the control of the politicians that Scotland’s voters choose to elect and not those elected by another country through sheer force of numbers.

It’s really simple, ‘do you want Scotland to make its own decision like ALL other countries?’ That is all.

I too am tired of all the policy baggage dumped on independence, and you know what, it only makes it easier for those who argue against independence.

This article, is right up there with the very best by REV STU. If possible, it should be stapled to the foreheads of the clowns who spend their time arguing about this policy and that policy (talking about you, Bella).

Independence is NOT about policy, it is about Scotland running its own affairs. It is that f*****g simple.

Once we are independent, then we choose the government we want via elections.

(have to say, I think the SNP are their own worst enemies when it comes to this).

@Orri “Personally I think the answer to the monarchy is to insist Scotland gets the monarchy it’s meant to have had since 1320…”

The best thing to do about the monarchy is not give a toss about it. Who cares!? If some people need to cling on to it as some sort of psychological comfort blanket then leave them with it. Basically, who cares.

Once Charlie Boy and his squeeze are monarchs – even England will likely start questioning it. Why waste time on a problem that may well resolve itself?

I forced myself to read the crap in the Herald and now feel the need to gouge out my eyes. The drivel in that paper seems to fall neatly into the Rev’s “some arsehole says” category. I cannot imagine any other tourist destination in the world would ever decide to try to cut the number of tourists to any of their top attractions. Paris? Rome? Venice? Barcelona? The fact that these particular arseholes, who were quoted, seem to be based in Brighton makes my blood boil and smacks of a tame bunch of UK arseholes who denigrate Scotland from another country. I was in Whitby (England) a few days ago. You could not squeeze through the crowds. I was in York (England) a couple of days ago – ditto. Not many public toilets in either place I think. Should I ask them if Yorkshire’s top attractions need to be kept quiet?

Independence first, then we have the opportunities to decide policies for Scotland in Scotland by Scots.

As well as focusing Yessers of all persuasions, it back foots Naesayers.

When they disagree with that simple but strong argument, they must be challenged on their alternative. Instead of changing the subject to currency, pensions, borders, whatever … they must be forced to address the key proposal, that it is morally wrong for others to be imposing policies on Scots when they don’t want them. That’s been going on far too long, and independence addresses this fundamental democratic deficit.

If they admit they believe London knows best and we should just get on with eating our All Bran, that honesty could convert thousands!

I have always tried to explain to people that they aren’t voting for the SNP. It’s bigger than any party and more important too. The yoons love the party political debate, because it plays into their narrative. It narrows the independence vote into SNP vs Tory etc.

We win by taking the majority of Scotland with us. Right , left, middle. We lose by following the ultra left wingers or ultra EU believes. I am an ultra EU believer , anti Trident, anti monarchy but also anti Nato and anti Sterling. I know what and why I am voting for , but many people dont get it. They need to be made aware it’s not the SNP or ideology they are voting for.

When it comes to sovereignty I am with every shade or hue of Scot. We are together for Scotland then we can discuss the shape of our nation.

We can finally drop the tribal politics of Scot versus Brit. It’s easy to hate the Tories if you hate the Union flag. It’s harder to hate people who are part of your true nation.

IMO the YES campaign made a serious blunder in 2014 with their leftwing newsletters. Leftie ideas are fine and inspire many. However, it was not a smart move to distribute them in posh SNP areas in NE Scotland. In my keenness to contribute, I delivered quite a few to well off areas in Aberdeen, but I did feel at the time that they may be counter-productive in the wrong areas.

The Yes campaign can make the same mistake and produce leftie newsletters for posh areas. I for one, won’t be distributing them this time.

Re the Herald story about supposed over-tourism in Skye, Edinburgh and Loch Ness The call quoted in the paper “Visit Scotland should cease marketing any destination that’s exhibiting signs of over-tourism with immediate effect” comes from a Brighton-based travel agency which is currently advertising many famous and overcrowded destinations worldwide. It has three pages of adverts for holidays in Scotland – including Skye, Edinburgh and Loch Ness. The paper says that destinations are overcrowded because of being used as film locations. The aforesaid travel agency is also advertising an “Outlander Tour”. Hypocrisy or what? What the hell is going on? What is the Herald playing at? Don’t answer – I can guess.

Apparently Scotland won at doing something called cricket and it means there can be no more crickets ever again because we’ve had the cricket and it’s been decided and Scotland are the champions of it forever

Luigi
Absolutely correct. The best Yes literature by far was Wings Wee Blue Book.
No left wing polemics, no capitalism, just facts about how Scotland could be Independent.
I think people who attend the Under One Banner marches with banners proclaiming ‘Smash the Tories’ or ‘Republican Scotland’ and similar partisan slogans are simply self indulgent and are likely to drive away potential ‘Yes’ voters.
As others have pointed out, we need every vote. After Inde anything goes.

So in essence, until after independence is achieved, we’re ‘all under one banner’ – the objective simple, winning Scotland’s independence and not achieving our personal or our preferred political party’s vision of an independent Scotland.

All welcome under the banner – even a Tory IF he/she could genuinely support our independence. And after independence? I still won’t vote for anything like a Tory! In other words, afterwards it can be politics as normal in a normal, independent country if a majority is content with that.

Implication? In the spirit of being open to all those that might be persuadable, however unlikely, to support independence, no need for ‘Tory scum’ banners at Bannockburn or elsewhere at Yes movement events?

The trick is to maintain a simple message of independence with enough necessary, effective messages of reassurance on viability and risk of independence.

Od dear, a lot of tonic for the troops stuff in this discussion, but that won’t win over soft yes’s or soft no’s.

If we go into an Indyref2 without a position on the major things such as the currency and EU membership, then we can kiss goodbye to any chance we have of winning it. We got hit hard on the currency last time, because there was doubt about it in the public’s mind. To go into Indyref2 without saying which currency we are going to have would be much worse.

Remember how Independence was thought of before Indyref1 was called. It was not considered a serious thing by most people. Even calling the referendum didn’t change people’s perceptions in my experience. What made the difference was the White Paper which put meat on the bones and suddenly Independence became a serious thing to consider.

If we hadn’t got the White Paper then I don’t think we would have got anywhere in the referendum and we would not be talking of Indref2 now. Going back to having Independence being a vague concept is a terrible mistake.

This time round we are in a much better position (recent Social Attitudes poll for example) and we should stick to the position we had last time with the exception of change in the currency position from a union to a temporary use of sterling. We have pretty much the Goldilocks mixture of policies already.

I don’t think intellectual concepts of Independence are a vote winner. What use are they when sombody says “My heart says yes, but my wallet says no”. What use are they when somebody like my work colleague says “All I want to know is will I be better off financially with Independence”.

The No campaign will be talking/lying about things that matter to people and the Yes campaign will be talking about airy-fairy concepts. I don’t see how we can win on that basis.

George Wood @ 8.10
But you can answer your Colleague..
Obviously he will be better of.. because if it was looking like he wasn’t going to be he can get himself a Government who will make it so…
Or…. How can he make a Westminster Government improve his situation,when it needs to always take care of London first?

Is it no obvious that all that Scotland collected will be shared between 5 million and no 65 million,Whisky alone is, I think, worth around 5 million.
But if he needs that to be on the side of a bus,then you’d be better talking to someone else!
But if he is genuinely wanting to know,all the answers he needs are in the Growth Report or How to Build a New Country.
The Yes campaign have spent time and treasure to make them available to anyone,so that the concepts of a yes vote cannot be called wishfull thinking anymore..

We are no talking about airy fairy stuff,but the best deal for Scotland.
Simple really..
Is staying in the current UK Union the best thing or bringing the Government home the best thing?
Pick a Parliament that you can keep within slapping distance and your more likely than not to see some of the countries wealth,or keep Westminster… But if he still says he wants Westminster then ask HIM why!

This post is the closest I’ve seen to a distillation of the 766k comments on this place since it started, and the Buckaroo analogy is inspired.

When you strip out all the obvious troll-stuff, blind-alleys and bickering, this is what ‘WE’ commenters have been saying for the past five years. It helps explain (for those who require explanation) why this site has become so popular.

‘Eyes On The Prize’ still sums it up, for me anyway. Everything else is just fluff. Post-indy, we can bicker to our hearts content about whatever we like (and do so with home-grown Tories if need be) but the priority, always, has to be the complete removal of WM/EtonBoy control over our affairs.

As Westminster transfers Ulster to Ireland the hard conservative vote will wobble as they undermine their own grea Britain model
The farming and fishing community must now see the brexit writing on the wall for them
Let brexit proceed and call indyref2 on a short timetable

I don’t think anyone here thinks (or has said) that over-tourism is a purely Scottish phenomenon. The point is that a supposedly Scottish paper printed an opinion from a Brighton-based travel agent that “Visit Scotland should cease marketing any destination that’s exhibiting signs of over-tourism with immediate effect” while simultaneously advertising holidays in “over-tourism” destinations in Scotland (and other countries e.g. Italy, South America). The Herald’s focus was entirely on Scotland. Brighton-based travel agency bloke focused on Scotland. We should be able to accept constructive criticism of Scotland but not hypocrisy. I sympathise with other countries where over-tourism may be a problem but that is not the point.

After the Growth Commission report was published the MSM headlines were full “Splits within the Indy Camp” ect. Opponents of Independence thrive on such headlines.

To them there is nothing more appealing than to believe and read about Yes supporters squabbling with one another. We needn’t squabble, at least not yet since Independence is yet to be won. Don’t give them the pleasure, we all need to work together no matter your favourite flavour of politics until we first gain Independence.

The answer to any and all questions be it currency, monarchy or trident etc, is that the Scottish public will vote for the party who’s policies most suit their own after we’re Independent. It’s a damn better option that we currently have where a government is imposed on us no matter what we think.

That’s why we’re leaving the EU despite 62% voting Remain. We weren’t given any choice and would be OUT even if 100% of Scots voted to Remain. That is no choice at all but instead is dictatorship. Time we made our own decisions.

Agreed. Everyone has invested their own personal hopes in what indy might bring, but there’s no need to foist them on others who are likely to disagree. Not all our hopes will likely be realised in the event, but at least we will all have a flying chance. That’s all we have a right to expect.

Personally, I wouldn’t ever likely contemplate voting Tory, but shouting out anti-Tory political slogans or flaunting such banners at marches may be feelgood for some, but it gives entirely the wrong message to the people we need to convert.

AUOB should mean exactly that. All.

george wood @ 10:10,

I know what you mean, George. Some time ago, someone (alas, I forget who) posted a comment that has stuck with me ever since, and it was this: we need to keep our governors within easy kicking distance.

As others have already said, that’s what keeps things right. It’s not a matter of political party at all, since they all tend to get fossilised after a while in charge. (NB: a warning to those who seem to think we can afford to wait forever and a day for IR2. The tolerance factor is already starting to wear.)

Another democratic plus of indy: we junk a shedload of olde-world UK elections and all the media cr*p that goes with them. (To which add whatever new referendums the hoary old WM will produce in the future as it struggles with its own massive democratic deficit, its redundant old crusties, plus an ancient wreck of a building that will cost a king’s ransom to put back in a safe palatial condition again.)

Seriously, why should we stay in a system where we are permanently out-voted on everything, then told to shut up when we begin to question the manifest unfairness of it all?

Never mind just the inherent cost to our pockets, what about the cost to our self-respect?

I’ve said it myself, it really has to be independence first. The only question then to be asked is very simple:

@Tinto Chiel
True as well, Scotland has been paying off England’s war debts in exchange for a few Barons selling out Scotland to pay off their gambling debts (Darien), and we’ve been propping them up, maybe bar a few years if you don’t include compound interest, ever since.

So, I was surfing, looking for coverage of Scotland’s extraordinary victory in the cricket. On the BBC News website, the Scotland homepage doesn’t cover it. In fact, the only sports story they run is “Scottish Rugby “Toxic””.

The BBC News UK homepage, on the other hand, has the cricket story as the third item.

Great article.
I agree.
One thing further.
The independence movement should counter every British nationalist point with a more positive point.
In politics your point does not have to be written in stone.
As we know the VOW won the day for the British nationalists in 2014
This time the YES VOW will win the day
We can determine how the YES VOW is carried forward after independence is achieved
Cheaper electricity and gas
Cheaper petrol and diesel
Lower council tax
Lower taxes
Higher wages
More and improved help with housebuying
A massive house building programme
New bridges
Better ferries
Better roads
More flight destinations
The list is endless
The YES VOW cannot be disproved because a future independent Scottish government has not decided in which order all of these will be implemented but they will without doubt be implemented once Scotland is independent

@yesindyref2: all true. I have to laugh that this was a voluntary union. Most of the only folk eligible to vote in these pre-democratic times were simply bribed; the Act of Union had to be furtively signed in an Embra cellar; there were riots in all the Scottish cities when it got out; meanwhile, the English army menaced the border.

Sounds like a Tory multiplied organism.

I suspect they won’t have revised their play-book much for the next bash, just translated into 21st century terms.

Regarding AUOB, a group of us spent considerable time and thought before coming up with a banner for the Wings stall to encapsulate the entire campaign. It is shown in prominent position in many pics and videos and was a deliberate reframing of a specific establishment frame which we do not want to trigger.

The banner says: Choose Scotland – Big enough. Smart enough. Rich enough. It is gaining momentum and was in evidence at recent presentations on Reframing at a certain conference. The whole point was, we have enough, we have had enough for a long time, and we have had enough of another country running our affairs. Choose Scotland and let’s get on with it.

Getting involved in detailed discussion of any issue is a distraction. Want to know how to answer the currency “question” or any other establishment planted topic? We are currently recruiting trainers for Reframing workshops which we are rolling out soon across Scotland. Watch out for the Google form to sign up.

So in my lifetime a Scot has won Wimbledon and Scotland have now beaten the auld enemy at cricket. When I was a youngster these ideas were as crazy and as outlandish as Scotland being independent but they’ve happened.

There is a great deal of jumping guns going on today on Wings and more than a few wrong claims being made.

Can we please stick to actual facts?

Yes Scotland is indeed a country but in the context of, “The United KINGDOM”, the important fact is that Scotland is a Kingdom as is the, KINGDOM of England, but while Scotland is composed of just one country the, “KINGDOM of England is composed of three countries, or, to be more precise, two and one half countries. (Ireland is a country that is politically partitioned).

So to stick with legal facts, the United Kingdom was formed in 1706/7 as a United Kingdom and has never legally been a unified country and that is the very crux of the matter. That Treaty of Union has only the signatures of two, equally sovereign, Kingdoms on what is still today a legal International Treaty. The claims that there was an Anglo-Irish Treaty of Union is bogus history.

Ireland become an integral part of the Kingdom of England in 1542 by the Crown of Ireland Act. That was before there was a United Kingdom of Great Britain in 1706/7. So Ireland, all of it, was brought into the United Kingdom in 1706/7 as part of the Kingdom of England. Wales was also part of the Kingdom of England after the Statute of Rhuddlan in 1284.

The country of Ireland was first partitioned with the formation of The Irish Free State in 1922 but the Irish Free State was a United Kingdom Dominion and certainly was not, “Free”. The Irish Free State was dissolved in Date dissolved on 29 December 1937., when The Irish Free State dissolved itself and declared itself a republic.

Northern Ireland was given the option to go either way – with the Republic or with the United Kingdom. It chose to go with the United Kingdom but as all Ireland had already been part of the Kingdom of England since 1542 the change in 1800/1 agreement was not a treaty of union but the actual title, (this from memory so check it if you like), was along the lines of, “The Anglo-Irish Agreement”, so the only actual thing it did was to change the title of, “The United Kingdom of Great Britain”, to, “The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland but, as already shown, all Ireland was annexed, (not united with), by the Kingdom of England in 1542.

So, with that explained – let’s get down to brass tacks.

The United Kingdom is a two partner Kingdom formed by the still legally active Treaty of Union 1706/7. It is not being run as such and it never has been – but that is what it legally is.

Now brass tacks states, (Article 19 of the Treaty of Union), that the two Rules of Law of the ONLY two, equally sovereign, kingdoms have, and will always remain to have, their own individual legal systems. The good reason for this is that the two kingdoms systems of law are incompatible. In that in the three country Kingdom of England has a legally sovereign monarchy, who, (in 1688), legally agreed(read as were forced), to legally delegate their Divine Right of Kings/Queens, to the Parliament of England.

While, under Scots law the people of Scotland were/are legally sovereign since 1320. and there is the case that needs to be made known to the people of Scotland.

As should be made known the legal shenanigans that forced the Treaty of Union upon the Kingdom of Scotland. BTW: There really is no need for Scotland to declare itself a Republic for under Scots law the monarchy, (and hence the Parliament of Scotland), is already not sovereign under Scots law and English law does not apply in Scotland. Her majesty, (and hence the Scottish Parliament), are the subjects of the legally sovereign people of Scotland.

As to those shenanigans- The London Scot, William Paterson was working for Sir Robert Harley who was, (among other things), the English Spy master. Paterson instigated the subscription scheme to bail out the English monarchy/parliament that became the Bank of England.

Then Paterson popped up in Edinburgh and instigated the disastrous, (for Scotland) Darien expedition. This was designed to fail from day one. First of al, the English, and the Dutch, pledged to finance 50% of the scheme but, after it was too late to call it off, they withdrew their offer. Next the English crown/parliament ordered the Royal Navy not to help or protect the Scots expeditioners and the Royal Army, (already on the scene – were ordered not to aid the expeditioners.

This led to the wealthy Scottish landowner/parliamentarians going bankrupt but were thus open to the English bribes Those who couldn’t be bribed were either threatened or blackmailed to vote to throw away Scotland’s birth right.

Not to mention that Daniel Defoe, author and English undercover agent, had the ear of the Scots parliamentarians and was reporting back to Robert Harley. His letters are in the English archives today. Then there were the masses English troops at the border and the English fleet lying off the Firth of Forth.

The Treaty of Union was NOT a freely agreed treaty but even if it had been it has never been stuck to by Westminster.

Now all you need to ask yourself is this – How come there has not been an, elected as such, parliament of England since the last day of April 1707 yet now Westminster is the de facto Parliament of England that finances itself as The United Kingdom and lords it over Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as if we were English Dominions?

Legally Westminster hasn’t a leg to stand on and, providing we give the reconvened old Parliament of Scotland our legal sovereignty as, (as a majority), the case can be taken to the international courts or, more likely, just declare the United Kingdom is ended and let the Kingdom of England take Scotland to the international courts – and good luck with that Westminster.

and the polling place poster with the babies hand was excellent too as was the final ppb. remember how piss awful the bt ppb and leaflets were?

but i agree with much that is on this thread, peter bell said recently in one of his articles that ” diversity was our strength in indyref1, indeed it is always a strength in grass roots movements, but it was often repeated simplicity of the no campaign which won the day” (paraphrased)

we dont need another 640 page white paper, for detailed info the wbb2 will be more than enough.

detailed leaflets should be attacking the union, eg, we dont need to say how much the pension will be in an indy scotland, i saw a graphic on twitter showing the uk pension compared with other eu countries and it was bottom of the list. although, pensions is something that a detailed promise of an increase would be useful convincing oaps

we will need some basic outline of the direction of travel. we cant just ignore major issues like currency and the eu. if only to get people singing from the same sheet.

but we do need some catch phrases, yes we can, big enough rich enough smart enough, enough is enough etc,

Since Sovereignty has been punted by the Media, Westminster version of course.
We need to be making a distinction,because if we keep to the Buckaroo Principle its bound to come up..
It can be a dry lengthy subject unless it’s yer personal hobby horse…

So..
I tried to think of a quick way to describe what we in Scotland mean by Sovereignty, that most could grasp, for someone who has about 30 seconds to explain…

Think of it like Defence…
To get the whole thing and make it work we need an Army,a Navy and an Air Force.
We call this the -Military-

Or. (Depending on who is asking)

We understand God to be equally
The Father,the Son and the Holy Spirit…each is a necessary part of the whole
We call this the Trinity

In Scotland we have
Scotland’s People
The Parliament
Scottish Law
In Scotland we call this -Sovereignty-
Each needs to be present and able to exercise its own power for Sovereignty to work as it should…

The problem is obviously the Parliament…
Our rightful Sovereignty is trying to operate in a Parliament that has a different kind of Sovereignty.
Ours has nae need of Crowns,Lords or Remembrencers….

There is indeed a part of our Sovereignty, that, because it is in Holyrood has been working only on the instructions of the Sovereign Scots.

But we have to accept that we are leaving some very important parts of our precious Sovereignty in the Westminster system..

While it is our right to do so… It is also our right to change this at any time..
We should note that…
Scottish Law still works,….always has
Scottish politicians still work,….always have
It is the People part that is being sacrificed and diluted between two Governments…. Bring that home and the Sovereignty that has always been ours can finally be realised,and reach its full power.

I hope that helps somebody to explain!!

Don’t know about Indy ref two slogans as I said but, when it comes to Sovereignty… As some ” Highlander” once said..
….. There can, Be, only one…..
Anyhoo I’m now going to spend the rest of the night hiding from Robert Peffers..LOL

Shrodingers Cat @ 1.33
(,I’m no tryin tae pick on you…Really I’m not)
But …A Vow …Really?
I’m all for promoting what is possible,that’s perfectly fine.
A Vow is absolute,it actually means something.. Or it should!!
But
We had a Vow in 2014,granted an impossible one that Westminster is by its very nature forbidden to implement, but even so it was a Vow..
We can’t do that… A Vow must be kept,and the Yes movement have neither the power or the right to make one.
Never mind Honour or Trust…Or how important we know it is to win Scotland’s Government back..

IMHO… We have to be aware that as soon as a Yes Vote is delivered,a Reunification Campaign of some description will begin…. We cannot make promises that cannot be kept.
Otherwise we make a rod for our own back.

We have to get out clean and make sure that the idea of reversing the Yes vote is as ridiculous as America becoming a colony again!!
At a guess we are going to at the very least be bombarded with…The People of Scotland,must have the final say on the separation deal….
Now while I know, and you know,it’s a crock…but that narrative is in the public domain!!
We can’t afford to go throwing Vows around..Don’t ye think?

WBB2… Has a solid reputation for telling it like it is,and if its no broken there’s nae need tae fix it!!

Q. How do you get rid of the SNP at Westminster?
A. Vote for independence

Q. How can I get to choose what sort of country I want to live in?
A. Independence

Q. How can we get rid of the braying and quite frankly nasty politics that we are subjected to at the moment?
A. You can’t as long as politicians exist. It is in the nature of politicians, but with independence, they will be our politicians, that we in Scotland voted for.

The only difficulty is winning people over to the fact that Scotland has a right to decide.

It is very easy to ask what about this or that and thus complicating the process. The British do this well, its called divide and rule. An indy campaign should be kept as simple as possible. It will require details if we want to avoid another Brexit like shambles, with the fine detail being a part of any potential government as part of their manifestos.

Once people understand that the detail is secondary and independence is not a party political issue, but a basic human right, then we will see progress.

Everything else can wait. The transition to independence won’t happen overnight and won’t happen before people decide if they want it or if they are happy to be told what to do by a different country. After it is decided, it becomes a normal political race where a government is elected on their manifesto.

Personally, I thing there should be a written constitution that is decided in the transition period after a transition government is formed. I don’t think that party politics, in its current form will work as the Westminster parties all work for the British first and foremost, so they will become redundant in an iScotland, but that is something to be discussed after the Big Issue is decided.

Carolyn Lechie in today’s National proves that point. We have the usual left attack on the SNP using the deputy leadership vote as “evidence” that the far left Utopia is the answer.

The far left should contribute to shaping Scotland but the tail should not wag the dog. I am getting a bit scunnered with the attacks on the very popular main party of Scotland. At the recent RIC the SSP leaflets and speakers were focused on attacking the SNP instead of Westminster.

Post Independence the Holyrood election result will shape the direction of travel but we will not win the Referendum while we have this constant noise from the far left. They do not win elections so why do they think it is for them to dictate policy?

Diversity can be overdone. It was the migrant vote which lost the 2014 IndyRef. If the vote had been GE + 16 year olds. YES would have won?

Independence needs a Central bank. Takes two years? It is being done,

‘Better off’. Everyone in the U.K. Is worse off with Brexit. With more to come. Some people obviously do not go grocery shopping. Or check prices.. Smug in ‘their own’ comfort zone. People are being sanctioned and starved. It is just disgraceful.

How can an IndyRef be called in the middle of Brexit mess. There is likely to be another GE. Maybe the 1/2million people who are supposed to support Independence will go out and vote. Instead of letting the Tories in. Instead of constantly berating the SNP have a word with them. Often they are the ones who complain the most. They did not even vote. Losers. Independence is not just for one IndyRef it is for every vote. Ie vote SNP/SNP. Not only will be Scotland better run but Independence will be achieved. The Tories could not make a bigger mess.

Nicola is the only one making sense. The SNP was not given coverage by MSM. Patronised by ITV.

Scotland has always be left of centre. Most successful countries are capitalist but slightly left of centre. In the middle for stability. It depends on resources which Scotland has got in abundance. The most cohesive, equal and fair countries are happier and more stable. With government intervention for equality and fairness. Worldwide. Pretty much SNP policy.

Just compare IR and NI for growth. Since 1923, even using a pegged £currency.

As an aside, Angus B Macneil has a wee twittewr poll going as to when the next referendum should be held, I would say 2021 but I would also like to quote someone else, can’t remember who it was but, “whatever Year, the next ref should be held on the 4th of July, that should keep the Yanks quiet”!

More MSM nonsense. Nursery care has not doubled yet. The councils were giver extra money for extended nursery provision. Two years ago? In some places all the places advocated were not taken up. In Aberdeenshire £2Million of extra provision. Costs are awarded as per pupil. It was supposed to be spent on education, which the unionists are always trying to cut. Using the statutory limit (30 pupils) as the norm. Instead of keeping class sizes down with the money allocated.

ACC 100 teachers short. Yet spending £200Million on building hotels and shops. Already saturated. Paying £7million in interest. Spending £300Million on a Conference Centre. Cutting essential services and education funding. They should be building schools and houses instead. Refused a gift of £80million to predestrianise the City. Unionists kept in power by a two job Tory ruining the City. The wind turbines were supposed to be 11 miles out. Not so close to shore. Eyesore.ACC muck up once again. City £1.2Billion in debt causing traffic chaos. The Muse mess diverting roads.

I find it amusing that Englands Brexit debacle and racism in throwing out Polish people from the UK as some sort of scroungers is leading to Poland benefitting from the economic fallout and looking like ending up financially stronger than England

Sometimes I feel if we get to our shelters in time, we can maybe survive the blast and shockwave of Brexit, and if we ration our food and water, after a couple of years once the fallout has began to dissipate a little, we can cautiously emerge from our bunkers and then discover the SNP has at last geared up and is ready for the fight.

For Independence, I place my trust in the legal legitimacy of Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty.
For Independence, I place my hopes and aspirations in YES and AUOB.
That is all.

You know the odd thing aboutScotland and its independence is this, there are few countries who have become independent in such good circumstances.

On day one of independence, Scotland ALREADY has its own legal system, its own EU compliant justice system, its own education system, its own transport system, its own healthcare, its own university sector, its own power generating capacity, it is self sufficient in food production… and so on.

Other countries have to set these things up from scratch.

Scottish independence, compared to almost ANY other country, is relatively easy. People in positions of power need to stop over complicating it. And we really need to start ignoring the ‘Colin Fox’s’ of this world.

Divide and conquer is the unionist gameplan (as it was with ALL their colonies), and it seems their are some in Scotland who ‘notionally’ support independence who are happy to help them.

Their is an old adage in marketing (which has become a bit of a cliche); ‘keep it simple, stupid’. But it’s right.

As an aside, I watched the video showing how many times unionists used the word independence, since March (and its high), but what was really interesting is that they have clearly decided to ALWAYS refer to it as ‘second referendum’, or ‘second independence referendum’, with the emphasis always on the word ‘second’. Given that 2014 was a rather long time ago, is it not time the indy movement stopped playing by the unionist choice of words, and just started calling it the independence referendum. It isn’t indyref2, it’s just ‘indyref’ or ‘indepencence referendum’. No number is required.

When you add a number, you emphasise the fact this is another indyref, thereby assisting unionists, when in reality the last one was a long time ago.

would love to see the unionist faces 🙂
also, it can be as vague as we want it to be, same as theirs was,

secondly, after a yes vote, who cares if it is upheld? the unionist didnt uphold their vow.

3rdly, the unionists will very likely try out another vow, why wouldnt they? it worked the last time. we should get in 1st.

4thly, your point about stopping a unionist majority at the next holyrood election, and the subsequent indyref3 which would result, whether that is before or after indyref2, is well made.

however, this is going to be the case regardless of what we vow or promise during indyref2. WGD has already hinted that we may need tactical voting to ensure an indy majority at the next holyrood election. we need to ensure that a unionist majority is not in control of holyrood for the 1st term of an indy scotland. that way ensures that when a yes vote in indyref2 kills the union, it stays dead.

if we get to our shelters in time …. we can cautiously emerge from our bunkers and then discover the SNP has at last geared up and is ready for the fight

The problem I have with this ‘wait for Brexit clarity’ approach is – exactly what should become clear?

If the hard Brexiteers get their way, or the slightly softer ones screw up, then the UK will leave in March and the disaster will be crystal clear! Presumably we will get some warning that this scenario is coming. Fair enough. THEN we all know where we stand.

However, the Tories have become professional time wasters and there is no more clarity now than two years ago. TMay might well fudge her way through the Divorce Treaty and into a Transit of 21months. She will have to keep NI in the single market as a backstop beyond this and could try to achieve the same for the whole UK to keep the DUP support.

Brexit clarity could easily be 3+ years away!

IMO IndyRef2 timing should not be tied to Brexit developments alone. Brexit is merely a symptom of wider disease.

Scotland voted to remain in the EU:
But the Scottish Tories at Westminster are refusing to represent the views and votes of their constituents or their country (Scotland) by upholding their party’s position in England therefore representing constituents in a country they weren’t elected to represent

Divide and conquer really shouldn’t work in Scotland due to the Clan system and the ready adoption of it by most of Scotland.

Tartan and assigning patterns to new Scots and old helps.

Point is Bonnie Prince Charlie and other great losses are what we’re encouraged to celebrate/commiserate . Alongside Wallace and Mary Queen of Scots.

All romantic defeats but little mention made of there being Scots on both sides. The latter should really only be a footnote in our history. Exiled ex-Queen runs to cousin and plots to overthrow her and possibly conquer Scotland and depose her own son. Maybe not as much of the Scots on both sides.

Thing is when the shit hits the fan the clans gather until the crisis is over. We act as one but become individual again.

Something that makes the rejection of multiculturalism and insistence of a solitary “britishness” truly foreign to us.

Of course, the MSM and other cohorts would hammer a Yes movement that didn’t come up with solutions and policies that addressed the concerns of voters and business.

I’m not sure how wise it would be to say “we will address those issues after we have achieved independence…”

I like the growth commission report because it answers these more immediate questions without pandering to the usual political views and dogma of the left.

I also think we should ditch the romanticism. It’s mostly embarrassing. When I hear people talk about how great Scotland and its people are, I think of the sectarian problems we have and other stuff and think what a pile of crap.

Scotland should aspire to be a normal country, not an exceptional one. We have a long way to go before we can be exceptional. Normal is fine, like Norway, Belgium, and a pile of others that do very well in the world.

Scottish Tories at Westminster are refusing to represent the views and votes of their constituents or their country (Scotland)

Your view, and mine, is that MPs should put the will of their constituents first. Also, we consider “their country” to be Scotland.

I hae ma doots that those Tories see it that way. From what I can make out they are all Greater Englanders, not even Unionists. And I think tomorrow in WM we will see how almost all Tories put their party and government first, all else second.

The issue really is, why did Scots vote them in? Yes, they rallied the BritNat vote, but that isn’t the whole story. They won by pretending to be something other than what they are, and the media was complicit in this.

The reality is, they are up to their oxters in London Tory policies and Greater English Nationalism.

The pretence is, they are somehow they are dissociated from this and ‘Scottish’.

Shrodingers Cat @ 9.46
Well, I’d care about a Vow that was made and not kept!
Why be like them and in the process give those who will try to reverse the vote ammunition?
If we are trying to give Freedom a Country then we should start by giving Truth a Home!

But yes (sigh) their faces would be a site to see…almost worth it…but only almost!

Brexit clarity will consist of Westminster having to commit to a negotiated settlement with the EU which will be a little harder to ignore than the “Vow”.

It’ll also show how far down the river they’re prepared to sell Scotland in particular but the UK in general for their own interests.

Westminster might avoid the clamour for a referendum on any deal given rejecting it doesn’t abort Brexit but simply defaults to a hard Brexit. Surely any unionist politicians from Scotland would back indyref2 if it allowed Scotland to reject a bad deal or no deal and negotiate one more aligned t o it?

It may also show how unwilling Westminster is to negotiate or compromise rather than demand and storm off in a hissy fit when they don’t get their own way.

re ‘celebrating’ defeats… that’s why they put the Armed Forces celebration in Stirling on the 700th Anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn – we’ll show them in two weeks tho..
They can’t bear to see us celebrate winning, just think back to the winter olympics and the Clare Balding incident about Team GB and why so many ‘down south’ dislike Andy Murray, they must be hating the cricket news this morning and do you remember a few months ago when we beat them at rugby and won the Calcutta Cup – it was the briefest EVER reportage of that event, gone from the newspapers pages within 24 hours.

Perhaps worse, however, was the disregard – dare I say, disdain – for the Yes movement. In recent weeks there have been massively significant events which have shown how the yes movement is growing, maturing and becoming more active. The marches in Glasgow and Dumfries, as well as The Gathering in Stirling, are rightly regarded by the wider independence movement as landmark events with great import for the independence cause. People are bound to be perplexed and offended that Nicola Sturgeon chose to ignore them.

It grieves me to say it, but Nicola has made a grave error of judgement. Doubtless, some will say that that she was ill-served by her advisers and speech writer. There is some merit in this argument. I can’t be the only one who cringed at references to “the NHS” rather than ‘NHS Scotland’. But, as Party Leader and First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon is ultimately responsible. The Scottish buck stops with her.

Listening to Nicola Sturgeon’s remarks about the referendum I got a sense of something bordering on complacency. In her failure to give to much as a hat-tip to the Yes movement, for the first time ever I got a disturbingly distinct impression of a political leader detached from the base of that movement.

Orri says:
11 June, 2018 at 11:31 am
Brexit clarity will consist of Westminster having to commit to a negotiated settlement with the EU which will be a little harder to ignore than the “Vow”.

Compelling Scotland to leave the EU against the unequivocal sovereign mandate to remain is nothing less than Constitutional subjugation. You accept it, or you don’t.

Waiting forever to know the details of Brexit implies there might be a version of Brexit that is somehow acceptable. For my part, I can save you your prevarication, NO manifestation of Brexit will be acceptable to me, because acceptance of Brexit is acceptance of subjugation and an unconstitutional failure to respect Scottish Sovereignty.

I see on Facebook that Misreporting Scotland’s viewing figures have dropped to about 200,000. If that is the case and with the high probability that those that read newspapers also watch TV then the pish that is peddled as news by MSM is seen by about 5% to 10% of the population.

This is a remarkable state of affairs. We need to pwn the interwebs for Indyref2 🙂

If every country in the world has it’s share of racist head case nut jobs and the percentage of which is a conservative 10% for every country then England has more of these lunatics (5.5million) voting on stuff than the whole population of Scotland so Independence for Scotland is a much more sensible proposition to more quickly and easily clear up the 500.000 or so idiots we’re stuck with

Outvoted by nutters who don’t even live here doesn’t seem sensible at all, why would anybody want that

“Can some of our professional Camera and Sound people give some basic tips to our budding broadcasters.”

While I’m not a professional video maker/editor I have been making films & videos ever since I was just out of my early teens.

I would never presume to tell anyone how to do video/film production as new ideas come along frequently but might I suggest you could do well just by telling them what you find wrong with their productions?

Keep in mind they have not got the facilities & equipment available to the likes of the BBC/STV including studios. They are also operating in a rather challenging environment.

Their set piece videos are really good but attempting to cover massive marches spread out over miles,and all that entails, and doing so live, is a rather difficult task at any time.

IMO the SNP are very bad at promoting Independence. They are absolutely terrible at TV interviews, they struggle to get the message across.

They are just as bad at rebuttals. How many times have you listened to an SNP MP/MSP stutter and stammer their way through an interview and you end up screaming at the telly saying “why didn’t you say this or that”.

And during IndyRef1 when BBC Scotland was in full anti-independence mode and broadcasting lie after lie, the SNP where nowhere to be seen to fight our corner. It was so frustrating.

My point being that the SNP need to stop being so nice and so honest.

The BritNats win the argument day after day because of their blatant twisting of the facts. The SNP should learn a few tricks from them.

Look at the damp squib the Growth Report was. It was too negative and down beat. Just another example of a missed trick by the SNP.

We need a firebrand mouthpiece coming from within the Scottish Government. And the sad thing is , I don’t know who it will be.

You’re right about the Scottish Tory MPs being Greater England nationalists and not unionists. Unionists at least have a belief in Scotland as a country, however much they might ignore or be in denial about the gross inequality of the union.

Mundell the Secretary of State for Grimsby is Exhibit A in the case against the Scots Tories being real Scots.

They wish to finish Scotland politically and culturally, and as a means to that end are willing to ruin Scotland economically also.

Brexit clarity will consist of Westminster having to commit to a negotiated settlement with the EU

Which settlement, though? There are two.

Firstly the Divorce Treaty, which is pretty much known right now. The UK could easily sign up to that. That guarantees a 21month of Transition. Nothing obvious will change. It will be sold to the public as a ‘necessary deal’ and presented as ‘giving away little’.

That would offer little more clarity.

They could of course storm off in a “storm off in a hissy fit” before March, then we are into different territory. I think they will fudge their way to getting a Divorce Treaty.

Secondly, there is the future relationship with the EU. This is the bit Scotland/SG needs clarity on, if Brexit is to be the litmus test for IndyRef2. It could be single market membership, or it could be a basic trade deal on goods only, or anything in between.

In the short term, TMay will continue to issue woolly words saying they want all sorts of benefits and cooperation, contradicted by red lines. The EU will not be impressed, but will leave debate to the negotiations several years away.

So, no imminent clarity here either.

And, they could always “storm off in a hissy fit” again!

In five years time all will certainly have become clear, hissy fits aside, then it would be sooner.

Truth is, if everything is left to hinge on Brexit, I think the best option for Scotland (and NI) would be a hissy fit and walk away.

@Indy 2. Have to disagree with you regarding Nicola being complacent re the next referendum. She has, at the moment, to tread a fine line, we know it is going to happen she knows it is going to happen the MSM media knows it will happen and boy are they ready to throw the shit. Colonel gadafti and her pack of hyenas are salivating so that the can toe the party line with the same pish as the last time. She is damned if she does come out with a date and damned if she doesn’t. The last thing we need is the MSM to see independence supporters questioning her commitment.they will use it as they will use any comment they can lay their hands on.Ffs even Sophie Ridge was trying the old Andy Murray one, will you be supporting Engerlund in the World Cup? Good answer though maybe if they do win (they won’t) then we will no longer hear about 1966.Still banging on about that over 50 years later.I am confident that in the Autumn after the failed Need it negotiations are public date will be announced.
Ps would be great to see 100,000 at Stirling. I think she might just notice these things.

Liz g says:
If we are trying to give Freedom a Country then we should start by giving Truth a Home!
—————–

i’m not suggesting we lie, eg commit to actual figures etc, but we can vow to protect nhs scotland and keep it free at the point of use etc,

this doesnt really tie us into any spending commitments or force us to lie, it is as vague as the unionist vow was, and many believe that even tho’ the unionist vow was very vague, it swung indyref1 for them.

i dont know if thats true but it was a very successful pr coup for them,

Presentation and debate are either talent based or an acquired skill. Even then on the latter, there has to be some aptitude. Does it make you good at your job though? It’s rare to find a politician that can do the job and have the charisma/debating skills to appear on the goggle box to put forward any damn thing with style and gravity. The SNP have been fortunate on that front to some degree with a few names, but they can’t be everywhere at once answering every query in every interview.

Most reasonable human beings when faced with that kind of spotlight tend to forget stuff, stammer, get caught in the headlights and suffer brain fade. It happens. Being questioned by professionals in front of cameras or on radio is scary stuff. Being questioned by partisan pros and a studio ambush of pundits doubly so I’d imagine.

Personally, I just want them to be good at government and administration. Huge bonus if any have the publicity tools t’boot mind you, but being able to do the administering bit should come first. Stars of stage and screen we have aplenty. People who can govern effectively, not so much.

What you get if you have the image but no substance? That’d be Ruth Davidson I’d say.

People need to be aware. The UK media, (99.999999% of them), are entirely hostile to the current Scottish government and the independence movement. It wouldn’t matter how talented you were, how clever, how right on your brief. It’ll come out in the wash, how they want it to come out.

We play their game when we gnash our teeth at something they set up for that very purpose.

Mrs May is following through with Brexit as she claims that is what the (small) majority – the people – voted for. She is not taking any of the wishes of the remain voters into consideration at all.
So why is the SNP or Scottish government trying to keep everyone in Scotland happy when we voted by a much larger majority to stay in the EU.
So daft, but legitimate, question – can NS not just say Scotland has spoken and we’re not leaving? Can “they” (Westminster) really force us to leave? How would/could they force us? Physically? Or would it be considered UDI and illegal?
Thanks.

Let’s face it the facts are these, if NS does not call a referendum by say, September, then that means the Scottish Government are content for brexit to be forced on Scotland. It is no good continually saying this or that is wrong, but then steadfastly refusing to take DECISIVE action to rectify it.

The SNP seems obsessed with timing (their will NEVER be a right time, and certainly not after brexit), but when September 2018 comes and goes, and if NS does not call the referendum, then that will be the final opportunity gone. Everything from that point on will be lip service. The Scottish Parliament will be made a London plaything with powers removed at will, Brexit will be forced upon Scotland and all its people against its democratically expressed wishes, and all whilst we have an SNP Scottish Government.

It does almost feel to me like they kind of accept brexit, when in reality most people are seriously p*ssed off about it. We need action, not words. London is carrying on with its plan uninterrupted, as before.

I agree with Peter A Bell, there is a complete lack of urgency. I hear people say, the new depute leader will start preparing the SNP for a referendum, to which I ask, why the f*ck has that not been done already????? It’s been four years. Four years to plan and prepare.

Westminster feared Salmond (despite their bluster), I do not think they care what NS says. And I do know people won’t want to hear it, but it is how I see things. The SNP need to start fighting and stop, FFS being so ridiculously ‘reasonable’, and offering to ‘talk’. They need to start saying NO to brexit and NO to power removal. No discussion, no ‘talks’. That is the kind of language Westminster understands. Westminster sees people who are reasonable as people they can ignore.

Indy2 agree Gordon Brown who of course is not in politics turns up on a politics show and proceeds to pontificate about “the country” he will of course be
Wheeled out when next referendum kicks off. But he is of course not in politics now. No doubt his partner in crime known as the lying bastard will also be wheeled out. Training should be compulsory for all SNP mp’s. I mean Fiona and Angela mainly.

A lot of people on this site fail to come to terms with the fact that should Nicola name a date for Indy2 the Tories could decide to have a general election on the same day, then where are we.
Nicola must wait till the terms are known and then call Indy2 General Election or not, until then its just wait and wait. I’d love to be holding Indy2 this Thursday… sadly we are not.

The mandate for another referendum came about because of the specific wording in the SNP’s manifesto,

“We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.!

There are only two reasons given in that statement for another Independence referendum.

“clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people”

“or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.”

It appears that there may also be additional changes in circumstances coming down the line such as the power grab which only becomes relevant if we are taken out of the EU.

This is why clarity on Brexit is required, we are not yet out and cannot be absolutely certain right now that we will be out.

It increasingly looks to me as if there are only two most likely outcomes in these negotiations. Staying in the EU via another referendum or crashing out with no deal at all.

Both sides just seem too far apart for a third outcome to be more likely. We’re playing for high stakes, cool heads are required and they don’t come much cooler than Nicola Sturgeon.

Failure is not an option next time, we all know this. It’s great to see the Yes movement getting up a head of steam and some momentum behind it. This will all help if the referendum is suddenly thrust upon us with a very short campaigning window. So it’s as well to be prepared.

I think also though we have to be aware that right now we’re playing with Westminster’s ball and they can put a spike in it any time they like. May spiked the SNP ball when she called the 2017 GE. We can’t allow them that opportunity again, that’s the main reason as I see it for looking for clarity on Brexit before making our move.

I see that sanctimonious bitch of bitches chickens have come home to roost…Isabel Oakshott….life comes at you fast.

Bad boys of Brexit ……so not just the BOYS….looks as if the Bad Girls allegedly played their part too.

This piece of work is just one of many on the list of smug cnuts who needs named and shamed…..oh how they all laughed at the idea that Scotland could be independent….while allegedly active in rigging a referendum , allegedly withholding information for ‘2 years’ ( Oakshott) , allegedly having dubious meetings with Russians on Brexit, allegedly accepting Russian money to fund Brexit leave campaign……the only thing that is not defined as alleged but factual is that they truly are a bunch of fcuking cnuts…..as if we didn’t know that already.

Taking back control……..’control’ being operative word with this bunch of alleged UKOK ("Tractor" - Ed)s….oh the irony of all of those rags headlines on ‘Traitors’….a bit of ‘ look over there not here’ skulduggery me thinks……and this is what ‘No’ peeps voted to be part of in Indy ref…..really ?…..this Better Together project just seems to me like it is just not working out they way we were told it would….I for one think the time is right that we were granted a decree nisi….Jesus we have the grounds….in abundance …setting aside all of JKR’s arguments which are now truly null and void….surely ?

In the name of the wee man wtf will it take for Scots to say enough is enough….I for one am exasperated with the apathy, delusion and general idiocy of those who still want to remain a part of UKOK.

So far Scotgov have called the procedural shots well. A little over cautious in some areas, but on the whole they’ve done the best possible. Anti Brexit statements made. Referendum bill passed. Continuity bill passed and willing to go to court to defend powers. Kept within legislative competences and adhering to and honouring the last referendum result.

Every part of constitutional endangerment that has occurred in the past four years, has been placed upon Scotland’s electorate and government by UK gov. NO PART of it can be laid at the feet of Scotgov or the population of Scotland.

When. Not if. When the union comes apart? It’ll be totally at the hands of the UK government and system that put itself before the needs of those in its care.

Nicola Sturgeon the only leader of a country that *HAS* to use Twitter to communicate because the media decide if or when they will let her use *THEIR* vehicle

Leaders of other countries make regular TV statements updates to the nation and or announcements, but not in Scotland
*Journalists* camp outside other leaders doors for interviews or snippets but not in Scotland

*Except* when it’s a prearranged statement with no questions for Ruth Davidson

So for those annoyed or irritated that the FM doesn’t do more in the media it should be remembered *The media won’t let her* until the media decides the moment to their own advantage

The truth will not out because we live in North Scotland Korea enemy of the free United Kingdom of England who make the rules

Anything to the advantage or good of Scotland achieved by the SNP must go unreported or at the very least minimalised so as to be insignificant

Maybe the arse will fall out from the bottom of the Tories house of cards before they even get to the beginning of brexit, it may topple or just plain collapse or implode, a bit like a controlled demolition… 21st century Jenga like.

Ah mean we’re now hearing on the wireless that the company ‘Poundworld’ is going bye bye, wow, that’s quite a thing!

Saying that, that makes business better for the new ‘Poundland Mega-Store’ moving in to the auld Whole Foods store in Giffnock.

It does almost feel to me like they kind of accept brexit, when in reality most people are seriously p*ssed off about it.

Aye, Robert, I hear what you are saying, but they are not p*ssed off enough yet. If they were, we would be observing at least 60% support for independence by now. There has been a slight movement to YES over the past year, but not enough. People are still coming to terms with BREXIT, IMO. Give em a wee bit more time, the penny will drop. 🙂

interesting article by lesley riddoch in the scotsman (i wont link to it)

this is another case of personal anecdotal experience of people moving from no to yes because of brexit.

for those asking why the snp is waiting to launch indyref2 it is because the voters are waiting to see the outcome of brexit.

the labour party, john mason, and mps are still spinning their jobs 1st brexit deal havers and will continue right up to the very last minute.

it was this cakism bollox which won the euref for leave and it is still being bandied about by the msm as a serious possibility.

it isnt.

1.SM and CU. there will be no deal for the uk. Treeza has already told the EU that the UK is leaving both. By definition, the UK has declared it will trade with the EU using WTO rules.

2. Jobs 1st brexit, red/white/blue brexit and farages Norway deal are all examples of cakism. why? because they all demand SM/CU access AND an end to FMOP. the eu has consistently said that this is not an option

3. NI, the EU has already proposed and the UK accepted that NI will stay in the CU/SM indefinately.

4.trade deal. there isnt one, A50 (written by a westminster civil servant) states quite clearly that no trade deal discussions can take place until the exiting country actually leaves.

5. Temporary Transitional deal. The EU isnt oblidged to offer one but it has. This is to lessen the impact of the uk moving to WTO. it wont include cars or finance and the eu will want access to fishing grounds in exchange.

so that is the deal,

a. WTO on 29/03/19 with 3 year transition for the UK to prepare for all its remaining trade with the EU to be under WTO rules. NI to stay in the CU/SM.

b.if the uk rejects this, WTO for everything on 29/03/19 and a hard border in NI

the only people who have put forward any realistic proposal is the snp, sm/cu membership and accepting FMOP. this was an option for the uk, until treeza told the eu that it didnt want it so it isnt even on the table now, regardless of how the commons votes tomorrow.

so this fiasco continues and people still believe that treeza is going to cut a super dooper trade deal, or that corbyn will ride to the rescue or that the libdems will get euref2 or that some lawyer is going to stop brexit….. etc etc etc.

no, the delusion will continue for a few more weeks until this entire goat rodeo hits the buffers of reality.

treeza may not like the solution for ni, but if she rejects it then the transitional deal will come off the table and we will face the hardest and quickest brexit possible. Is she deluded enough to believe her own rhetoric? very possibly

when this happens, the voters will be looking for someone to blame, that is why we are holding off announcing indyref2

….This is why clarity on Brexit is required, we are not yet out and cannot be absolutely certain right now that we will be out….

Then why aren’t we fighting with absolute tenacity and unshakable determination to stay in?

Instead we bend double trying to compromise, and we are flexible to the terms of leaving, -apparently, but our unconstitutional subjugation won’t be a sticking point. – Apparently.

I knew ALL I needed to know about Brexit on the 26th June 2016. I voted Remain because I knew Brexit would be an unqualified disaster for the UK and especially Scotland, and I haven’t seen any reason or cause for second thoughts on the matter ever since. Why is it suddenly so vital that I know the intricacies of Brexit? All I see is an even bigger disaster looming.

I was overjoyed that Scotland voted unanimously in every Council Ward to Remain in Europe, because the Sovereign people of Scotland had given our SNP Government the Constitutional green light to contest the sovereignty of Scotland and formally dispute the faux UK Parliamentary Sovereignty, in a definitive Constitutional test case which only Scotland can win. Hurrah! We’re on the way! …But no. We’re going to piss that formidable all conquering mandate up against the wall.

Brexit is not about Europe. Brexit is a domestic UK battle to assert Constitutional Sovereign Ascendency over Scotland, ours or theirs, and while they provoke us and strut around like they own the place, we are timidly dithering about like sheep, playing parlour games about how many more times the Unionists can say the word Independence than we do. Far from winning, we prevaricate endlessly, and we don’t even seem to know where the Constitutional battle lines actually are.

Even if all the planets lined up perfectly, and the runes fell perfectly for us, and Nicola had a rush of blood to the head and announced IndyRef2 for a week on Tuesday, – we would STILL in be in complete denial about the subjugation of Scottish Sovereignty which Brexit represents, and we would STILL be arguing over democratic principles rather than Constitutional ones. We’d maybe even have our referendum, but have no Constitutional mooring point to tie up the result because Sovereign Ascendency in Scotland would remain a contentious and disputed issue.

Maybe the time is near when we must take these Constitutional principles out the hands of Democrats because they just don’t seem to know how they are used.

There is only one question in front of Scotland, does it want to govern itself, or does it want to leave it’s political agency in the hands of another nation/culture. One that is pro-Brexit and increasingly insular and intolerant of difference. The future flavour of Scotland will become apparent as we grow into our autonomy. Btw, I hope the Growth Commission took account of the semiotic theory of space and place, as this tells us that autonomy from centeral authority, stimulates cultural development. As such, it is difficult to determine how an independent Scotland will grow. One thing is reasonably certain though, Scotland will struggle to grow within the current political union. Brexit will make that doubly so.

Do Scots believe in the universality of human rights, or are we happy to be governed by English Tories, most of the time? Leaving the safety of one’s biological rights in the hands of a Tory, is a tad optimistic, IMHO. Deserving of an immediate section order for those living in Scotland, also IMHO. 🙂

Laypersons’ belief in free will may foster a sense of thoughtful reflection and willingness to exert energy, thereby promoting helpfulness and reducing aggression, and so disbelief in free will may make behavior more reliant on selfish, automatic impulses and therefore less socially desirable. Three studies tested the hypothesis that disbelief in free will would be linked with decreased helping and increased aggression. In Experiment 1, induced disbelief in free will reduced willingness to help others. Experiment 2 showed that chronic disbelief in free will was associated with reduced helping behavior. In Experiment 3, participants induced disbelief in free will caused participants to act more aggressively than others. Although the findings do not speak to the existence of free will, the current results suggest that disbelief in free will reduces helping and increases aggression.

Oh yes Merryn Somerset Webb……..good one…………..another smug one…..’listen up Scots WE are in charge and WE know best….now run along and let the real decision makers control things’….that is HER attitude.

We also have Julie H Brewer , Katie Hopkins , Camilla Tominey, Carole Malone ….these are the Brexit She devils….oh so patronising and don’t they just know what’s best for us all….deffo witches cause they can so predict like what UKOK gonna be like post Brexit…like just so successful and so wonderful cause the world is UKOK’s oyster and the world has just been waiting for UKOK to trade with it once free from the reins of the oppressive EU……yeh and they really really believe that….like f**k they do…….hacks for sale….sell their souls to be relevant and kept in a job…especially now BRITANNIA going over to the dark side….I say going over but some have been living there for a long time even before Brexshit and are delighted that they have succeeded in fooling the many morons for hire into their warped way of thinking.

What to do eh…..oh I know ……become independent….offload the WATP mob down into the Fatherland i.e. Brexit UKOK….and they can all live ( and us ) happily ever after…..reaping what they sow.

“However, they seem to be playing a long game of kicking clarity well down the road.”

That of course is exactly what the UK government have done since the day of the vote in the EU referendum. It certainly looks like their plan is to continue with this procrastination but I doubt they can get away with it for much longer.

At some point the EU will demand clarity or without it they might just pull out of any further discussion on the matter until the UK starts putting workable proposals forward.

These workable proposals do not yet exist and are unlikely based on current efforts so far. The border deal with NI is unsolvable unless the UK also remains in the single market and customs union or the Tories will lose the support of the DUP and that results in a another GE. A minority Tory government is unlikely to last long with the current state of the divisions in the Tory party over the EU.

The best that May can hope for then is to get the EU to agree to kick the can further down the road by signing up to some kind of indefinite transition period. Possible but doubtful.

For sure, a scenario like that would put the SNP and the announcement of a 2nd Independence referendum in a difficult position if it were to happen.

None of us have a clue though as to what the future will bring. I’d like to see a bit of clarity and I’m absolutely certain that there are quite a number of No voters that could be persuaded over to the Yes side once they know for certain their fate by remaining in the Union rather than the EU.

Scotland has waited more than 300 years for this opportunity which will be the last in my lifetime for certain. I’m willing to be a bit more patient for longer.

Our time will come and there will be no disagreement over the timing. It will be abundantly clear when the time is ripe.

Now who was saying, a few weeks back, that Wings doesn’t actually campaign for independence? Probably Colin Alexander or Rock..?

Oh, and where’s Heedtracker folks? Anyone? Some of the politically soft helped our resident trolls and chased him off, to maintain decorum? Hurt that he argued with their precious selves too, pathetic.

The UK unionist’s media have had their gloves off for decades maintaing some of those idiosyncrasies listed above, while we’re expected to suffer and respect the sensibilities of the ill-tempered uncultured fool they’ve made of our people.

Great point “ Dr Jim @1013 a.m.” All Scots MP’s at Westminster should be voting against Brexit, as
every local authority area in Scotland voted to remain in the EU .Therefore every Tory, Labour and Libdem MP representing a Scottish constituency should be voting against Brexit. This brings the question of the Sovereignty of the People of Scotland issue” to the fore, as if any Scottish MP’s vote in favour of any Brexit outcome at Westminster then quite clearly this is a breach of the sovereignty of the Scottish people and our people’s Sovereign “will and vote” was to remain in the EU . Every single Scottish MP should be voting and reflecting their constituents wishes .
It is nothing short of a constitutional outrage that our country , Scotland’s clear and sovereign vote to remain in the EU is being ignored . Notwithstanding the other outrage of the “ Westminster powergrab” on Holyrood . Is it perhaps time to inform Barnier ( and May) that we are not prepared to accept the loss of EU citizenship for our people and that we will use all legal and political means to contest this ??

Then why aren’t we fighting with absolute tenacity and unshakable determination to stay in?

———————-

cos it isnt certain we will be leaving, not for a couple of more weeks

——————

North chiel says:
All Scots MP’s at Westminster should be voting against Brexit, as every local authority area in Scotland voted to remain in the EU .Therefore every Tory, Labour and Libdem MP representing a Scottish constituency should be voting against Brexit.
————————

this assumes that the mps will be getting a vote in the commons on precisely this issue. hint, they wont, even after the negotiations are finished, the mps can vote to accept or reject whatever sh1t deal treeza brings back from brussels, but if they reject it, then we leave with no deal. what should the snp mps vote for when this arises? if labour and the snp vote against the deal, then we leave with no deal, we will get blamed for the hard brexit

We can’t allow the Tories to just have a Brexit infinite timescale that never reaches any type of conclusion. They are trying to deceive the EU the same way they did with Scotland, have some vaguely worded deal that they can break but claim they are meeting.

At some point a decision has to be made that WM has had enough time, they are making no meaningful progress and waiting any longer will seriously damage Scotland.

In my opinion we may have already past this point, if not it’s pretty damned close.

starlaw says:
11 June, 2018 at 4:08 pm
“Just received a telephone call from an agency claiming that HM Customs are filing a case against me please press one etc. etc.
I’m sure this is a hoax…. be warned”.

A couple of my friends and my sister have had that call. It is a scam – they wind you up about bailiffs coming to get stuff etc and if you can’t pay immediately they suggest you buy lots of I-tunes vouchers for them instead and give them the details. My elderly friend only found out when the girl on the supermarket checkout asked him, politely, why he was buying £500 worth of I-tunes vouchers.

Suggest you block the number from calling you back and/or report it to the Police. Stay safe.

The Shetland out of its box ploy is not only to diminish Scotland but also emphasise how far from Edinburgh it is.

Expect if indyref2 is declared for a bogus independence movement to rise. After a second No there’ll be a push to declaring them a Crown dependency due to their having been a guarantee against a dowry that was never paid, much like the Isle of Man and Jersey/Guernsey .

That’ll be to convince us somehow that should Scotland declare independence then we’d lose most of the EEZ and oil.

Won’t work as the Crown they’d “belong” to is Scotland’s.

Besides which England is the wrong kind of Vikings, being Danish. Scotland and its islands and Ireland are Norwegian. Norway is currently independent from Denmark.

If Shetland was to leave Scotland it’d probably join Norway as a protectorate at a minimum than under London rule.

A bit of a giveaway if they use the word “bailiffs”, because of course they are sheriff officers in this country.

However, not everyone would actually spot that.

We have decades of media ignorance and incompetence to thank for a lot of folks not actually knowing what the situation is in Scotland on all sorts of matters. Well truth is, a lot of the subterfuge has been intentional.

HMRC is aware of an automated phone call scam which states that HMRC is filing a lawsuit against the recipient of the call and states they should ‘press 1 to speak to a caseworker in order to make an immediate payment’. We can confirm that this is a scam and you should end the call immediately.“

As of 1st Oct 2017 it states there were 9930 military and 3970 civilians. Not all of them will be earning in excess of £26,000 and anyway if you earn less than £33,000 in 2018/19 you will pay less tax in Scotland than you did in 2017/18 not more.

Only the equivalent of Corporals and above will pay more tax. So as far as milatary personnel go this is roughly 60% and equals roughly 5,600, if you include civilian MOD personnel that adds another 2,400. Making a grand total of 8000.

it is deliberate, during the council and general elections, people didnt want to hear about indyref2, they were more concerned about brexit.

that is why indyref2 was taken of the table, why it is very rarely mentioned by nicola and also why the tories talk about nothing else.

i understand that folk are itching to get going, so am i, but it wont be long now until this brexit fiasco is played out.

they cant hide the damage being done by brexit, RR and landrover both moving out of the uk with job losses today,

brexiteers on social media and in public are becoming ever more muted, the mood in the country is changing and it is the unionists who will get blamed for this.

treeza has held this government together by telling brexiteers fantasy deals can be done and kicking any real decisions into the long grass. but this process is almost done, there is zero chance that the deal she gets will save her skin. indeed, i think she always knew that once the deal was know she would be toast.

I think we will see another ge before we see indyref2, and once again, the snp will be the only people able to offer any real plan to go forward(efta/eea) neither the tories or labour can do that without agreeing to FMOP, which they cant do, so expect more cakism from them both, even if it is wearing a bit thin, they have nothing else they can offer.

Orri, or should that be King Orri?
re Shetland , I think pur favourite yoon, the long haired one, did a program on the Shetland Dna and it was majority Celt not Norse. Anyways all they can be is a Crown Protectorate and that just gives the 12 miles, none of the oil fields are within 12 miles.

If the intent is what I think it is, then the FM won’t do anything till at least two more things have occurred over the course of the summer.

Saturday was all about attacking Tory policy. One last swipe at government and the institution of central government before those conclusions are reached and of course preparing the ground. Probably one of the last chances the FM will get to address such issues in a televised public forum without interruption or ambush before the autumn.

As a public sector worker – the 2% cut to GPD that the Bankers 2008 crash caused, has cut us to the bone, with another £10 million cuts to be found yet, (in my organisation) and I don’t see where these can fall other than into the bone.

I suspect – and support – that it is likely the SNP has made sure that less cuts have fallen on the Scottish NHS, but lets look at Brexit.

According to Westminster’s Impact Analysis –

a soft Brexit will reduce GPD by another 2%
£39 bn less per year 700,000 fewer jobs

And a hard Brexit ‘No Deal’ WTO Rules by 8%
£158 bn less per year 2,800,000 fewer jobs

If you couple that with a Holyrood neutered by a power grab, there will be no NHS Scotland and almost no public services left.

That 2% (from memory) equates to 80,000 Scottish Jobs, (Fraser of Allander report) or a cut of about 1 in 30.

For those of us who grew up in the Thatcher era and remember how hard it was to get the most mundane of jobs and how hard you kept a hold of it when you did, the above brings a cold sweat.

Now, I’m going to speculate a bit, and it will make for uncomfortable reading. I do so with the best of intentions.

The British Empire has lost 59 nations over the years, its Colonial rule reduced to a rump. And where India was the Jewel in the Crown, Scotland is the Cash Cow, and boy do they know it.

In almost every case – and I can only really think of Canada and New Zealand as the exceptions – it fought physically, it fought psychologically, it fought tooth and nail and with every unwritten rule in the dirty tricks handbook, and when that wasn’t enough, it wrote some new ones.

Without doubt infiltration and knobbling of the main political resistance movements/parties was done and was done early doors.

The labour party is a point in case.

And for such a ruthless organisation, if they can’t bribe, and they can’t compromise, well then people have loved ones, and loved ones can die.

We have a duty of care to our country and its freedom, and decency demands – we have a duty of care to our elected representatives.

If it came to the bit, whereby, with all the stars lined up, and with the absolute critical state of the crisis before us, our elected party starts dropping the ball, missing the open goals, and generally just falling that wee bit short, when there are simple things they can do to win.

Then at that point, what will you do? Will you be surprised? Really?

Do you have a plan?

We could be shocked, be disappointed, be paralysed in our disbelief, our sense of betrayal. We could raise questions as Constituency meets, to be met with a wringing of hands and sheer inertia. We could analyse and remonstrate, and get deeply frustrated and angry.
We could, in fact spend a great deal of time and energy attempting to find evidence (while desperately hoping none exists) that this was in fact happening.

And all of that would be a very great waste of time. All of that would be playing into the hands of the powers that be and would prove nothing.

If the above scenario has not, does not, will not happen to the SNP – then it will truly be a unique institution in the history of the British Empire.

Do you have a plan?

And the reason I have raised this, is not to get folk criticising the SNP left right and centre. That is not my intention. My reason is to prepare you, so the wind doesn’t get knocked out of your sails and we don’t get caught out.

The SNP are not going to put out leaflets that educate people about Scotland’s real economic strengths, (to pick just one subject of many). There will be no Billboards, no car bumper stickers, no T shirts. They will not do it.

If you want info graphics with that kind of information on it, we – the Yes Movement – are going to have to do it.

But there are things that only elected representatives can do, for example triggering Article 30, and taking it to court in a timeous manner if needs be.

I asked if we have a plan. One plan might be that the Scottish Parliament voted for our Mandate to hold another Referendum and therefore it does not belong to the SNP.

I suspect we may need to work round our elected Representatives, not attempt to get them to up their game, and I truly believe we should be prepared for this scenario.

I hope the above is taken in good faith. It was hard to contemplate, For those who disagree wholeheartedly, I simply ask, would it hurt to have a contingency plan, would it hurt to prepare for a worst case scenario. I would respectfully suggest the existence of one would make it less likely to be needed.

Want everything that happens in Scotland to be decided in Scotland? Want the political party you support, whichever party that may be, to represent Scotland and make decisions based on Scotland’s best interests? Want a democracy you can actually take part in?

I see some military draftees are complaining about paying more tax then England. Too bad. You benefit from a better NHS, better education system, No fees to higher education, free prescriptions etcetera.

Get your tax paid for you brigadier general then hand back all the other benefits the military get. Lower paid personnel benefit in Scotland but ask why ordinary staff get paid so low. Answers in a postcard to a MRS May c/o London, England. Sorry don’t know the Minister of Defence. Maybe tank commander knows?

The wee wummin in Bute House and her pals have to keep their cards close to their chest re indyref2, can you imagine how it would be rubbished by the press and tv if they were to drip feed them anything.

Slowly but surely the gargoyle with the bags under her eyes will stumble.

Then hopefully the wee wummin will catch them all with their drawers doon.

If a GE comes before an Indyref, the SNP will have to have independence as their main clarion call, not anodyne “Stronger for Scotland” or some such. I’m sure Son of Cambridge Analytica will have a new list of SNP targets prepared in any case.

In the short term, all the foot soldiers can do is turn up in numbers at Stirling in twelve days and let the Britnats poop their Pampers.

I don’t mind voting and don’t really understand why others are upset at having to vote. If anyone doesn’t want to vote,then they don’t have to,or,they could just move to China or North Korea,where voting won’t be a problem.

Independence first,then we can decide stuff for ourselves. Scotland might even vote consevative,but it would be 100% a scottish choice then.

if the options were no deal or wto/temp transitional deal/NI in CU/SM, it is difficult to see how labour and the tories could continue to offer cake, they would need to chose,

I cant see how either can agree to NI remaining in the CU/SM.
this will leave the snp a clear run when arguing for efta/eea as opposed to a very hard brexit.

We already have a mandate for indyref2 but the latest polls show the SNP winning back seats, it would be difficult to argue that there is no appetite for indyref2. add to that that there is a good chance we might end up holding the balance of power, giving us leverage for a section 30

i think that once the situation is finalised, the moggites will rebel, we could see this ge in oct/nov

Scotland pays an average of £4Billion fowards Defence. £1Billion for Trident. Independent it could cost less. No illegal wars etc. £Billions are going out of Scotland. An average of £40Billion for Defence for 80,000 military. Where is the money going? £10Billion a year for Trident. There were disproportionate numbers from Scotland in the Military because of higher unemployment in Scotland. Now there is a problem with recruitment. Including a reserve force.

@ yesindyref2 – well at least that is honest I would much prefer England to use their own flag on theor own assets.

Re Tory MPs respecting the wishes of their constituents, you can forget about that. Buzzfeed has an article with leaked tweets from the Tory Euopean Research Group. Seems they’ve been using WhatApp to conspire against the electorate.

Scottish Tory, Andrew Bowie, is one member of the group. But they are not happy about being outed.

@ yesindyref2 – well at least that is honest I would much prefer England to use their own flag on their own assets.

Re Tory MPs respecting the wishes of their constituents, you can forget about that. Buzzfeed has an article with leaked tweets from the Tory Euopean Research Group. Seems they’ve been using WhatsApp to conspire against the electorate.

Scottish Tory, Andrew Bowie, is one member of the group. But they are not happy about being outed.

Actually her speech was just about right and very uplifting and I see no need to alert our frantic enemy what exactly we are going to do and when. Tomorrows’s vote may be a tipping point and the watershed and it is still entirely possible we will have referendum this year(for which our enemy will be unprepared).

Meantime as we don’t do anything right support for independence continues to steadily climb, a majority of our people now believe we will be better off independent and the latest poll shows Labour being virtually wiped out (again) in Scotland and the Tories dropping seats.

There are of course a number of other very interesting options other than a referendum in pursuit of independence.

In how many seats did the SNP get more than 50% of the vote at the last election?

Have you forgotten the success of Unionists United at the last “snap” election?

They seek to destroy the SNP and the independence cause and will, sadly, succeed.

Scotland was on the verge of independence after the Brexit vote but Nicola spectacularly squandered a once in a 1000 years golden opportunity by wasting more than a year flogging a dead horse – a separate deal for Scotland which was never going to happen.

“How I wish that the Scottish Government would read your final paragraph and act accordingly. It sounds unarguable.”

It is unarguable, Sara, and that is the point.

BTW: sorry for the tardiness of the reply but I’ve been getting tests for, among other things, suddenly being unable to see things properly. It turns out I’m not going blind and with treatment and a course of medication, things should improve as suddenly as they began. Now I just need worry about the other tests.

But I digress. There was tenets of English law invoked by Teresa May against Scotland going way before the Treaty of Union was enacted and England’s law, (and English law affects all three Kingdom of England countries), celebrated the signing of Magna Carta on which much English law is based, but Magna Carta has no place in Scots law. The Treaty Union, (article of union No/ 19), makes that quite clear. Scots & English law cannot be reconciled one to the other and must remain forever independent.

Yet Westminster, when Westminster chooses, applies English law to Scotland. The big sticking point of this legal independence being that the Entire Kingdom of England is a, “Constitutional Monarchy”, in which the monarchy of England is legally sovereign.

However, after the English parliament rebelled against the monarchy of, (the still independent), King of England and deposed him in 1688, they forced William & Mary to legally delegate their, Divine Right of Kings, (a.k.a. sovereignty), to the Parliament of England. Yet in 1688 both Kingdoms that united as the United Kingdom remained independent until the Treaty of Union in 1706/7.

Thus Scotland has never been a constitutional monarchy. If for no other reason than the Declaration of Arbroath of 1320 changed the legal sovereignty of Scotland and made the people, not the monarchy, sovereign. Auld Lizzie is Queen of Scots – not Queen of Scotland and, that being so, she can never be Queen of the United Kingdom. She is Queen of England, (the Kingdom), but Queen of Scots.

” … What a relief it would be to be shot of Westminster and in control of all our decisions, just like normal countries.
Sigh.”

Aye! You have it right and I have a sneaky wee suspicion that Nicola Sturgeon, a trained lawyer, (and a good lawyer), just may be thinking along those same lines but, to use the words of Theresa May, “perhaps the time is not right yet”.

I am encouraged in that regard to some of the things Nicola has hinted at but not yet said outright. It certainly looks now as if Nicola, and her legal team, may be trying to force Westminster into trying to take the matter to the United Kingdom, (Westminster instigated), Supreme Court.

The point being that this would open the door to challenge the legality of the so called United Kingdom Supreme court and that would open the door to appeals to the International Court of Human Rights for a ruling on the matter.

In essence as the Treaty of Union states that Scots and English law cannot be other than independent of each other a United Kingdom Supreme Court is a total nonsense and being English Top heavy will always be biased.

Plans for a £15billion bridge between mainland Britain and Northern Ireland are being backed by Boris Johnson, The Telegraph can disclose.”

Perhaps someone should point out to Johnson that if Brexit turns out as he would want, NI will have reunified with the rest of Ireland and Scotland will be an independent country.

Mind you, it might just transpire that both events will have been driven by Johnson and Brexit. The unlikely bridge will never officially be called ‘the Brexit Bridge’, however it might acquire that nickname!

Peter Bell’s take on that in the latest issue of iScot is interesting. (To paraphrase:) He reckons May’s obfuscation is deliberate and clever in that it is intended not only to hold the Brexiteer cabal to close account for the shambles they have wreaked, but also to deliver up by stealth the weakest possible Brexit, in which the UK will continue virtually indefinitely in a quasi-stable transition state.

If that’s true, and the notion has merit, there will never be a Brexit crisis as such, just an ongoing never-exitum.

So to turn your point around, if the crunch will never definitively come, can we afford to waste time waiting for something that will never happen?

The crucial issue is exactly what is covered by the SNP mandate, namely that we are being coerced here and now by an anti-democratic “fix” into a situation that is injurious to our wellbeing and directly contrary to our expressed communal wish.

That is the fundamental point. It could have been about anything, really, a full-out hot war or whatever, but it’s about something fairly fundamental noneless, what IMO history will judge in this new era of looming trade disputes, as a categorical error of the first magnitude.

By all means let’s give a little more time for the public mood to shift by dint of growing understanding of the realities, if possible, but I still believe it will also have to be actively worked for in a proper campaign.

Can we afford to delay until we lose 150k+ EU resident voters, as will happen from April next year?

It’s worth reminding everyone that in the mandate

… clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people or if there is a significant and material change …

, the joining preposition is “or”, even though some seem to persist in pretending it’s “and”.

schrodingers cat @ 13:49:

…until this entire goat rodeo hits the buffers of reality.

Heh, heh. Liked it. A wonderful mixed metaphor, which just about encompasses the dire totality of the entire grand guignol. In which of course we are unwilling participants, not mere onlookers.

Reading your comment there, it struck me that we may be in a period which will, in time, be recognised as a post-‘law’ era. We have U.S. Presidents like Bush Jnr describing the Declaration of Independence as ‘a goddam piece of paper’ and this latest clown, apparently, hand-shredding any legalese which vaguely annoys him, no matter how important it may be. We have a succession of UK govts which routinely cover-up anything which may present even a nebulous threat to their authority, and a culture in which secrecy, duplicity and blatant lying is celebrated if it allegedly helps ‘national security’ (e.g. conveniently ‘losing’ voluminous evidence of systemic child abuse by parliamentarians.)

Rev Stu, in this important post, has given us all much food for thought. I’m probably quite bitter about the amount of time I’ve *had* to spend on indy-related stuff over the past five years or so, and heaven only knows I do zilch compared to yourself, Rev Stu, Kevin at IndyLive, Lesley Riddoch, Peter Bell, and hundreds of others who’ve made huge (sometimes career-crippling) sacrifices to aid this cause. But the one thing which constantly makes me furious and determined not to just retreat back intae ma wee bubble is the utterly scandalous state of ‘democracy’ in this country. It simply doesn’t exist in any meaningful sense so long as we have London elites making the most important decisions for us.

Sorry for just stating the bleedin’ obvious, as usual, but it’s my contribution to the discussion and I’m trying hard to make it as simple as possible – the situation we are in, and have been for decades, is so profoundly UN-democratic that it cannot be allowed to continue. We have a duty to ensure that it doesn’t, and if we can’t or won’t? then we deserve to witness first-hand what the Tories have in store for our children.

“If the UK government goes ahead next week with the arrogant assumption that they can overrule the Scottish Parliament’s decision not to go along with clause 11(?) of the withdrawal bill, then, to me, that constitutes “a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014”, thus a trigger for indyref2.”

@ jfngw who said :
11 June, 2018 at 4:15 pm
“We can’t allow the Tories to just have a Brexit infinite timescale that never reaches any type of conclusion. They are trying to deceive the EU the same way they did with Scotland, have some vaguely worded deal that they can break but claim they are meeting”

Things are moving in the EU.
PM May’s “backstop” plan has been officially repudiated
M Barnier has consulted with his prime minister and president and

‘Constructive exchange in Paris with the Prime Minister @EPhilippePM. Respect for the principles defined by the European Council and preparation for dealing with the consequences of Brexit.’

Totally agree that Clause 11 of the withdrawal bill is another significant change in circumstances. However if we actually remain in the EU then it becomes irrelevant as the powers would stay with the EU.

“Hope you get your peepers back to full working order asap.
Reading your comment there, it struck me that we may be in a period which will, in time, be recognised as a post-‘law’ era.”

You are 100% right in your views, Ian but there is one wee error you got wrong – This bit …

” … the situation we are in, and have been for decades, is so profoundly UN-democratic that it cannot be allowed to continue.”

As I keep pointing out all the actual historic evidence is that those Londinium elites have been at this undemocratic way of doing things since the Romans first recorded British history and bear in mind that what was to become Scotland was not overrun by the Romans – we were fighting against south Britain even then. After the Romans south Britain was ruled by successive waves of various Germanic tribes including the Normans. These are not generally recognised as Germanic tribe but actual were.

The name, “Normans”, is a contraction of, “Norsemen”, and the Germanic tribes were not from what we now regard as Germany but were from over towards the Scandinavian countries. Thus Normandy is a contraction of Normans country. These settled in what was France just exactly as the Anglo-Saxons were giver Land in South Britain and around the same time.

Yet we still have hereditary Peers from those old Norman aristocrats sitting in the House of Lords and a legally sovereign monarchy descended from the Germanic tribes. Add to that the Union of the Crowns never actually happened as the shared monarch wore two independent crowns.

The Darian Expedition was engineered by Westminster to bankrupt, not Scotland but the wealthy landowner/parliamentarians in order to bribe them and the London Scot, William Patterson, who served Sir Robert Harley, (English spy master), and Paterson instigated the Darien Scheme.

So The Treaty of Union was plotted and engineered by Westminster and there were English troops massed on the border and an English fleet anchored of the Forth and it is plain the Treaty of Union was an illegal, forced, deal.

Take into account that there has not been an elected as such Parliament of the country of England since 1707 yet Westminster has always run England directly and financed it as The United Kingdom and now uses EVEL to prevent any non-English Member from English only parliamentary business while devolution did NOT include England so in effect we have the Country of England parliament of Westminster treating the only other Kingdom in the United Kingdom as if it were an English dominion and devolving English sovereignty over Scotland.

Westminster has never in its entire exisance ever been a democratic entity.

The CBI and most business interests don’t want a hard Brexit, and Tories usually take account of those groups. They probably believe the closer they get to Holyrood2021, the better chance of their Union surviving. There must be a lot of behind the scenes pressure on TMay to avoid a hard landing cliff jump.

Yes, my concern is we can’t wait indefinitely on Brexit details emerging. That could be years away. It’s exactly what the Tories want us to do, IMO.

The problem is hanging everything in Brexit. There a lot more going on. As I said earlier, Brexit is just one symptom of a wider constitutional problem.

On the other hand it might actually all go hard, and become a clear and present threat.

The Irish government is due to publish a report soon on the ‘landbridge’ for Irish exports and imports to/from the continent, along with options for bypassing the UK.

EU Commissioner Phil Hogan today speaking in Rosslare says the Irish govt will soon be publishing a new study into the use of the UK landbridge by Irish importers and exporters & the various alternative options that may be viable

I totally ‘get’ what you’re saying, but just to finesse my stance a little – the ‘democratic deficit’ angle of the argument (as we might present it to unionists) assumes full suffrage. It’s only been a century since women were allowed any meaningful involvement, and Scotland is pushing the barriers further with the inclusion of 16+ citizens in polls.

Even having realised the most generous-possible enactment of ‘democracy’, we still find ourselves unable to get a hand on the most significant levers of potential change. We’re still (as far as WM is concerned) no more of a threat than the ‘parish council’ Blair envisaged.

If we can make ‘ordinary’ unionist Scots aware of the contempt we are held in by WM, indy is a shoe-in.

As I said earlier, Brexit is just one symptom of a wider constitutional problem.

Agreed. It’s just the most obvious transgression we have to show. One which has already loosened more former no’s than anything else. And is explicitly mentioned in the mandate.

Hard to ignore, thus! =grin=

It’s just a pity that Brexit in particular has been so befuddled by dodgily-funded flat-out public mandacity it still has a lot of people feeling confused and diverted instead of angry, as they rightly should be, given the nature of this particular anti-democratic outrage being attempted on Scotland.

But indeed, it’s only a foretaste of other horrors to come, if we don’t get out while we still can. Trade deal with Trumperica, anyone…?

Thank you for your cautiously upbeat take on Nicola’s strategy of getting a court ruling on Westminster’s treatment of Scotland.

I am just back in from a local Yes group discussion where people were a bit dispirited at the lack of a rise in Yes voters from 45% despite the appalling standard of intellect and decency at Westminster. They were also worried that the Brexit fears mean people are even less likely to take the risk of Scotland cutting loose from the Union.

I agree with you, and Breeks I think, that it would be a relief to take the question of Westminster treating Scotland like a colony, to an international court. The media would not be able to ignore the matter and with a result in our favour surely we would get an extra 6% Yes votes?

I would rather a referendum was held this year before we lose our place in Europe and also lose all the assets which Westminster will strip from us. I disagree that if we lose the next referendum, it is all over. Nobody else who loses a vote says “oh that’s it. We can’t ever stand again.” Of course we can.

The danger of further destruction of our economy and our society is too great. We cannot leave it much longer before standing up for what we believe in. We very nearly won last time when the idea of Scotland being self-governing was relatively new. Now it is a commonplace and recognised position. Surely we have nothing to fear but fear itself?

the great thing about it is it doesn’t even mention austerity, unlike all other articles disagreeing in part with the Growth Commission report. So, apart from the sterlingisation issue, it makes it easier to accept, as an alternative I think, and one I endorse. It’s also easy to understand, well written. I recommend it to the YES!

There is one thing I disagree with in that BC article I linked, and it’s where it says Scotland would have problems with joining (or transitioning in) the EU because of sterlingisation and the EU requirement for members to have an “independent” central Bank.

iScotland CAN have a CB with sterlingisation, just with limited functions, that’s all. So as far as I can see, iScotalnd could still meet the Acquis Communautaire with a bit of imagination and copious malt whisky [1].

[1] Are you impressed I got that right? Behold the wonders of cut and paste, and google to correct the original 🙂

Sarah @ 12.21
I’d rather we have at least an announcement of the intention to hold a referendum by this Autumn too Sarah.
But I do think that it’s best to wait till Westminster are committed to actually leave or at least till its obvious that a 2nd Brexit referendum is,or is not going to happen.

As I suspect, that a second Brexit vote would be Westminister’s counter response to our planned vote if we go too soon.

I don’t think its clarity on Brexit itself Nicola is waiting on…. it’s,the state of play in Westminster.
A General Election?
A change of Prime Minister?
A second Brexit vote?
I also think that there have to be former No voter’s who are quite laid back about Brexit and the Holyrood power grab because they think… We will be having a Referendum,yes will win, Holyrood will keep its powers and they will get to stay in Europe.
They are no necessarily politically active or vocal, but rather have just put it all to one side till they need to vote,because they think that’s just the way this is all going to go!!

I was out earlier talking to…people…and those …people.. I was talking to had virtually no knowledge of anything to do with Brexit, Holyroods powers being removed, companies relocating to other countries businesses going bust, but there’s worse to come, they didn’t care, they see it all as some sort of politics to do with London and Nicola Sturgeon’s just making a fuss because she wants more power…and…it’s really got nothing to do with them and it’ll all turn out OK in the end it always does

The problem with these people is you can’t be earnest with them or they think you’re some kind of radical zoomer stirring up trouble where there is none….in their minds

These people have the right to vote and some of them do but they just go along with whatever crowd they’re with blindly putting crosses in boxes in complete and total ignorance of any information because they neither want it nor care about it

I left thinking about how many people are like this and they could be the very ones needed to turn the tide towards the Scotland we want

But they don’t even know there’s anything wrong and tonight I’m more than sad because these undeserving lazy apathetic Bastirts could cost us a country and that just makes me angry

Hey Dr Jim, sounds like a tough crowd, the blinkerists, thankfully many other fine Scots have already learned and reached that turning point, in going from no to Yes!

On yer bus:

– Now is the time for Scotland
– Come and join us for Scotland
– What does Brexit mean for Scotland? See inside for details
– Scotland first for Scotland
– X marks the spot for Scotland
– Vote for Scotland’s way

Schrodingers cat @0333 pm, what about an SNP amendment to the Brexit bill , along the lines of “ Scotland to remain in the CU/SM “ . If a majority of Scots MP’s vote for the amendment, ( I assume that the vast majority of RUK MP’s vote against),? then we have clearly the sovereign will of the Scottish people being denied by Westminster. ( English votes for English laws is now part of Westminster “ democracy” . Therefore, why not Scottish votes for Scots law, and sovereignty ( also the continuety bill/law?).

Scotland – We’re driven by you
Scotland – Your country needs you
Scotland – Take it or leave it
Scotland – Make it yours
Scotland’s coming HOME
What does independence mean for Scotland? See inside for details
When did a you last play Buckaroo?

been away out of the country for 2 months as I was makes you realise how tedious and boring the political scene has become.
I will vote for independence when the time comes ofc, but I have turned my mind off to anything else, all the chatter has just got so bloody boring and predictable that its like groundhog day.
As an example, I was on youtube looking at the Andrew Marr show, and he was asking Nicola the same questions he asked her the last time I watched her on his dreary show, and that was quite a while back.
As I said, tedious and boring, time to ignore it all me thinks, and let it all go by me, 8 weeks away from it was so refreshingly good that I now understand why so many people switch off when it comes to politics.
I will allways vote for independence and i will do so again when the time comes, but as for all the rest of it, as a famous snooker player once said, you can stick it up your jacksy, I have had enough of groundhog day.
Caesar! Gu snooker loopy!

Just looking at the Sun’s collage of all things British in its “Great Britain or Great Betrayal” headline.

Don’t worry Scotland, you’re not forgotten, a 1934 “picture” of the Loch Ness Monster is there fulfilling Scotland’s contribution to the iconic Team GB lineup. So nice to be appreciated.

Makes a change from tartan kitsch and bagpipes I suppose, or does it?

For once however, the Daily Express has a headline I can live with. “Ignore the will of the people at your peril”. I’d no idea the Express was so sympathetic towards Scottish popular Sovereignty, but it’s the Express of course, and I presume that viewers in Scotland will be treated to their own headlines.

Remember the days when Newspapers actually reported the news after it had happened? They now publish threatening ultimatums aimed at democratically elected Members of their Parliament.

So many amendments, counter amendments and counter counter counter amendments. So many commentators talking about parliament and possible extensions. Who could vote for or agin them… That kinda thing.

Mmmmm… Do you think someone should tell them that Westminster isn’t in control of the negotiating process or its timetable? The process is the process and its controlled by the EU itself. They can vote for whatever they like in commons, but the final arbiters are the EU themselves. Lengthened negotiation process. Lengthened transition. It all comes down to are the EU willing to endure those things?

A50 can be stopped and reversed even, but it can’t be forever extended (much as May would wish it). It is finite and dependent on the good graces of 27 nations whom the UK and its media have been royally pissing off for the past two years.

I’m wincing before I’ve even written this post. Infact I’ve started to write it on previous threads but have held back. But here goes. We have something to learn from Trump. There I’ve said it. What’s worse is we probably have something to learn from Boris and the leavers. Time and time again I see the independence movement and SNP politicians trying to give detailed and thought out answers to questions posed. All it does is provide more and more ammunition for our opponents. Imagine Trump or Boris being asked about which currency they’d use. They would dismiss it out of hand as a preposterous question and move on. Trump turned the agenda on it’s head. He didn’t give any detail on anything and relentlessly bashed home his message. Did you and I think he was a moron? Yes. Did everyone who voted think he was a moron? No. We should stick to a very simple message that independence gives us the power to make our decisions. And hammer it home relentlessly.

Nicola Sturgeons strength but also her burden is that she genuinely believes what she is doing is correct. She will intelligently argue her point and most often than not she ‘wins’ the argument. The problem is, a well argued logical conclusion is not what a large number of voters want. They want snappy baseless answers that they can easily digest (I do concede you need a large help from the media here). She is also cornered into defending SNP policies which have got absolutely nothing to do with independence.

I think we already have most of the more thinking voters on board – any thoughts on who on the Yes side could provide a more simplistic rallying call to the those who apply less critical thinking? Someone with a big personality, not in the SNP and with the ability to pull it off. Tommy Shepherd immediately springs to mind but he along with other loud voices from 2014 are now under the heel of party politics.

As far as this article is concerned, I could not agree more. I would be delighted if Scotland had a Conservative government. Not because I support their policies but because it meant that the people of Scotland had the power to choose it. If we don’t like it we can choose something different.

@ Dr Jim – these people that you mention – the blank slates – perhaps they are on Prozac.

I don’t know the percentage of the population who are medicated nowadays but it is likey quite high, especialy among women. Maybe we shoud take Willie Rennie’s concerns about mental health more seriously.

I attended a talk on Scotland and Brexit by Mike Russell last week. He spoke for 25 minutes and took questions for an hour. He reminded his audience that we are only in this dreadful position because Cameron was trying to outflank UKIP and stop Tories voting for the Farageists by dangling a Euro-referendum in front of their noses. In other words all this upheaval and future shock because of Tory internal politics.

There is no clearer example of atrocious Tory behaviour: ruling for the narrow interests of themselves and not of “the country”. Their ability to get the proles to vote for them against their bests interests would be amazing until you remember all the big newspaper proprietors are tax-dodging right-wing billionaires who don’t give a flying fruit bat for anyone but control the news agenda.

And yet, as Dr Jim says, trying to get those who have been stultified by a lifetime reading the Daily Mail/Express to open their eyes and see they’re being crapped all over is almost impossible. The only hope of turning them is if those who are unreachable through ideas and persuasion are reachable via the pocket, i.e. if they think Brexit will cost them.

Re: Scottish-Irish bridge.
Aye good luck. You don’t just build a bridge.
You build roads. A 15bn bridge to link onto a two bob road eh? At best Dumfries & Ayr could be described as Coastal Tourist Routes not the main arteries of commerce.
But if Scotland has infrastructure investment then it prospers… Oh dear can’t have that. So it’s patently bollox

Jesting aside, I’d reckon they càn just invest in terminals in Man. It’s not part of the EU and already has (ahem) processes for goods shuttled around the British Isles Archipeligo and beyond. That’s their N.I problem solved and no need to invest in Scotchland.

Fishermen overfished the seas and threw dead fish back for years. All they had to do was use bigger nets. Like Norway. That was being done in Scotland (SNP Gov). Higher quotas.

The US has been sanctioning and starving NK for years. China helps them out. The US is the most protectionist in the world. Uses copywrite and patents to create a monopoly and charge what they like. US Multinationals tax evade and pay no tax worldwide. Mad cow came from Alabama. Cost £Billions and lost trade. Bad farming practices have cost £Billions.

Scotland can’t afford, in every sense, to be in this debilitating union with England. It can only worsen for us when England’s xenophobic brexit really kicks in. Scotland must get out of the union with England as soon as possible. Well before the next Holyrood elections.

In Scotland, foreign companies have been kept at bay but the country’s generous quotas for species such as herring and mackerel have been bought up by a handful of fishing families. Two-fifths of the entire Scottish catch by value, and 65% by tonnage, was landed by 19 powerful super-trawlers in 2016. Small-scale coastal fishermen, who operate 80% of Scottish boats, have to make do with 1% of quotas.

Alex Cole Hamilton the Lib Dems favourite bridge car counter
tells us today that he loves the EU and he loves the UK but he hates the SNP…again
And he hates the SNP because they’ve no right whatsoever to do what the people of Scotland voted for, that in no way is the SNPs job as Alex Cole Hamilton sees it…no, the SNPs job as Alex Cole Hamilton is concerned is to listen to the majority of voters in England (who are the UK) and remain silent so that when the disaster that is Brexit hits big time then Alex Cole Hamilton can say *the SNP stood idly by and did nothing*

Alex Cole Hamilton opens his mouth and makes smelly noises you couldn’t even blame a dog for

You’re nearly right. The problem is people naturally imagine and wonder ‘what after’. So, that accepted, how do you prevent fractionalism? My solution would be for the Scottish Government to say that, post-referendum, they’ll create a second chamber citizens assembly based on sortition. This lets people know that they’ll be involved in contributing to policies after the referendum, thereby lessening the relevance of those policies before the referendum.

Dr jim 1.06am. This apathy/ignorance makes me despair as well. I was back home recently visiting family in the west of Scotland. The number of closed shops and air of neglect in the towns and villages” compared to where i live down in dorset, are like night and day. And yet a lot of the locals sèemed happy with their lot and their union. Any other people would be screaming from the rooftops about the unfair distribution of the wealth in this corrupt union. I came away after my 2 week stay thinking ‘seriously WTF is wrong with these people. Ah well they’ll reap what they sow.

non-political scots… still they sneer at any suggestion of scotland as a free nation
indoctrinated jockholm syndrome

Indeed. The UK establishment has achieved a situation, built up over centuries, where the default position is to support their Union.

Within the living memory of many, supporting the continuation of the UK was accepted by the vast majority. Belief in an independent Scotland was the preserve of a small minority.

Then that small minority grew to a quarter, and now to a half.

There will always be BritNats here who support their UK. They are a lost cause.

As for the non-political who are still in the default UKOK state of mind – every one is a potential YES supporter if only their eyes and minds can be opened. Their stance is not ideological nor driven by self interest, it is simply the legacy default.

We all need to work towards making support for the Indy the new established default. It should be – the natural default for any country is self determination.

treeza is fast running out of long grass to kick brexit into. she has managed to keep the tories together thus far, but in a few weeks we will all know what brexit actually means.

in truth, there is no deal which will be acceptable to scotland, but more importantly, there is no deal which can be acceptable to the tory hard brexiters, except no deal, which wont be acceptable the the tory soft brexiters.

result, a ge in oct.
i doubt the london parties will give muchg thought to scotland but it is one thing to quietly pass a bill tho’ the commons which leaves ni in the cu/sm but the ruk outside and another to defend this position for 6 weeks during a ge.

whatever position the tories and labour adopt for their manifestos (good chance both will opt for no deal) those are going to be very hard turds to polish in scotland.

if ever brexit was going to help our cause, we should see signs of it for the snp in that ge.

if ni can stay in the cu/sm, why not scotland? if the answer is still no, then we action our mandate for indyref2

“Whatever the outcome of the referendum on 18th September, it will be a historic moment for Scotland. I just hope with all my heart that we never have cause to look back and feel that we made a historically bad mistake.”

Here we are, on the day when the government (which we didn’t choose) is about to roll back the devolution settlement as part of their noxious Brexit Bill, which itself is designed to tear us out of the EU (against our democratically expressed wishes).

Did we make “a historically bad mistake” In 2014? Did we do the right thing and stick with this Union?

When the EU have a vote on something all 27 countries vote as equals, and if any country dissents negotiations commence to resolve the problems of the dissenting countries

The UK had a vote they called UK wide but it wasn’t it was a population vote which by no stretch of the imagination was democratic because the population of England wins that every single time

They conflate their one nation crap with 4 nation crap to suit their own agenda
The UK is 4 separate parts but when it comes to what England wants it becomes one and the rest of us have to live with it

Now I wouldn’t object so much if I thought the English were miles smarter than the rest of us but eh on previous performance they’re complete and total merceneries and thick as shit to go with it, the only power they have is numbers and it’s all they ever exercise because it’s certainly not the power of their brains

They don’t like the EU so want to opt out then when the smarter EU shows them what that means they want to opt back in again but not pay for it or let their own population see them do it because that’ll show them up for how stupid they were in the first place, meanwhile Scotland and Northern Ireland who wanted no part of any of it is forced to accept the outcome

Democracy Engly style

Getting really really angry now and eh I’m armed with a laptop and I know how to use it

Know what would be a good chuckle just for badness, and to focus the Constitutional minds of certain people? Just say we exercised a little Sovereign muscle…

We, the Sovereign People of Scotland, propose that our place in the Joined Parliament of Union has become outdated, and in the interests of modern democratic accountability, our decision to send our Representatives there becomes subject to annual review and ratification by the sovereign people of Scotland.

Nevermind NO to a second Referendum once in a lifetime, once in a blue moon, or once every millennium, let’s propose to have ourselves one every year, maybe on the day before the Westminster Parliament is opened by the Queen.

It would be like a kind of “Russian Roulette Referendum” for Unionism. They’d have to get lucky time and time again, whereas we’d only have to get the numbers once. We could call it the Governmental Russian Roulette Referendum, or the annual GRRR.

Just imagine wee Ruthie’s coupon, GRRR’n away like a very grumpy Bulldog chewing an absolute hornet of a wasp…

One thing … what matters most to TMay and cabal – delivering Brexit or retaining the UK?

They will realise getting the first wrong endangers the second.

Priority wise, I think the answer will be keeping the UK. There will be some who would give up the UK in return for England exiting. I am certain the Tory government will compromise and manoeuvre to try to prevent disintegration.

No PM, especially a Tory, would relish going into the history books as the one who ended the UK.

Perhaps I am wrong and their nationalistic sense of power and invincibility mean they simply dismiss Scotland as irrelevant and unthreatening. That would be a mistake.

The Referendum Bill hasn’t been passed. It hasn’t been introduced yet. What was passed last year was a motion authorising the First Minister to request a S30

Last time the Bill took 10 months – March 2013 to December 2013, with the referendum itself 9 months later on 18 September 2014. That could probably be shortened to 6 months to get the Bill through, and a shorter campaign, but it can’t be done instantly.

What perhaps should come first is an Electoral Reform Bill, to ensure that EU and indeed non EU citizens living in Scotland get to vote, irrespective of Brexit. That should ideally be decoupled entirely from the referendum, as it will need Labour support to pass (2/3 majority needed).

@gala
I am certain the Tory government will compromise and manoeuvre to try to prevent disintegration.
—————-
thats my point, the compromises have already been made, that is what has held the tories together thus far, except all of the compromises by all the unionist parties have been excersices in cakism. treeza has drawn the red lines, out of the cu and sm. there is no 3rd way, no better deal, no A cu, etc, today is an attempt to redraw those lines, if it fails then the only option is to go to the eu with those redlines intact.

upshot
1. no deal, wto rules
2. 3 year transitionary deal for some exports and then wto rules for all of the uk exports. ni stays in cu/sm.

these are the only options, there will be no more wriggle room for treeza and neither will keep her party together.

The sensible compromise option for UK would have been 2. Indeed EEA is basically the terms of the proposed transition deal. However the Tories have dug themselves a massive hole by taking it off the table due to Trezza Mayhems contradictory red lines.

any option which included FMOP was never going to be accepted, even by the labour party

that is why we have had a string of proposals from all parties, farage’s norway option, corbyns A cu, treezas better deal, which all included ending FMOP. the eu has been clear from the beginning that no FMOG without FMOP.
that only ever left wto rules. aided and abetted by our media who hyped up these proposals as serious options has been the biggest failing of brexit.

oddly enough, the only real propsal put forward was by nicola, efta/eea was a real option for the uk and scotland, it is very possible the eu would have accepted this, but it failed because it would have meant continued FMOP and since treezas red lines were announced, it hasnt even been on the eu’s table

Will I be supporting England in the world cup, well no, why should I. This is despite that genetically I’m three quarters English, one quarter Irish, but I have self-identified as Scottish so see no need to support any other team. Plus my form of self-identification does not require any chopping of of body parts despite how much unionist would like it.

1) In 2014 Switzerland voted to restrict EU immigration. However the EU said the free movement of goods / people / capital / services were indivisible. So the swiss voters later changed their mind in a later vote to remain in the single market via EEA. (Switzerland has lots of referendums)

According to the ‘ press and journal ‘, there is fury today because they haven’t allowed time for any discussion on how the Divolved Parliaments will be affected by the bill.
So doesn’t look like they are concerned in the least, or they are just to petrified to face up to what’s coming.

also, by keeping indyref2 off the table and pushing for cu/sm (efta/eea) for scotland, it will make the snp look concilliatary, and logical (if ni, why not scotland?)

bear in mind, it will be the tories/labour who will have to defend the eu wto deal or no deal. not us.

By then, scores more companies, RR and landrover will have announced redundancies

We can campaign to overturn westminster and bring back all the powerss they have grabbed

it will allow us to point out to fishermen the tories duplicity while reminding them that efta/eea members are NOT part of CAP or CFP

here’s the best bit though, by the time this ge kicks off, the deal will be winging its way to the other 27 countries for ratification, by then it will be unlikely that wm could change the deal for scotland to stay in the cu/sm or indeed whether the eu would agree.

no, labour have already said they will abstain, they want to avoid any chance of the blame being pushed in their direction.

but when the deal comes back, they will need to support it or reject it, indeed they may need to chose to campaign for it in the ge supporting a border in the irish sea. that will be a very hard turd to polish in scotland. dick leonards days of having his cake and eating it are well and truely over.

agree : assuming WTO rules are a disaster (… it will be) then campaigning for Scotland to remain in the single market / CU is smart. for simple reason the UK government cant deliver what people of Scotland want and voted for. Independence becomes the de-facto safe option of economic sanity and maintaining status quo.

I always believed that independence would require measurable “brexit effect” to convince the floating middle voters who were unsure. holding IndyRef2.0 too early risked people assuming that Brexit was progressing just fine.

It helps that Westminster is so delusional and arrogant that they are setting up our wee saltire ducks for us!

As Doug says, Norway opted for EEA membership after narrowly rejecting EU membership in 1994 48:52 margin. What has happened afterwards is interesting.

Support for moving from EFTA EEA to EU EEA (as EEA membership is now compulsory for EU members) has fallen to very low levels – the most recent polls being 16%. There’s a similar picture in Iceland with support falling from the 40s to the mid 20s of percent. Switzerland it’s so low they’ve stopped asking. Lichtenstein – don’t know.

Where they are WORKs for them.

Iceland is a slight net financial beneficiary from being in the EU (-0.05% GDP). Switzerland and Lichtenstein pay 0.02% and 0.03% of GDP for the programmes they participate in. Norway pays 0.16% of GDP, which is exactly half what France pays (0.32%). Compare Italy (0.29%), Netherlands (0.36%) and Germany (0.39%). Ye olde UK pays 0.25%

Can somebody explain to me how Scotland actually gets a Soft Brexit Deal to stay in the Single Market? By what mechanism do we secure this?

Last time I checked, Scotland isn’t even recognised as an Interlocutor in the Brexit Negotiations, yet somehow we’re going to conjure up a deal that recognises Scotland’s economic activity as a distinct and separate commodity from UK economic activity, and is furthermore prepared to engage with Scotland in a dissimilar matter than it engages with England. That strikes me as quite a complex deal to be reached. How are the negotiations proceeding?

The only way Scotland can negotiate any kind of deal for itself with the EU, whether that’s membership or a Free Trade Agreement, is first to secure Interlocutor status, or International Personality as it’s properly known, so that Scotland can participate in legally binding agreements. That requires Scotland to be in control of its own Sovereignty, and to have secured international recognition for that Sovereignty, neither of which Holyrood currently has.

Holyrood can, and I hope will, secure recognition for Scotland’s Sovereignty, but thereafter, I fail to understand why a newly recognised Sovereign Scotland should merely pitch for a Free Trade Deal with the EU, rather than negotiate its full EU membership while our economy is fully compliant and aligned with EU standards.

It has actually taken us two years to get to grips with the probationary offer of transitional holding pen status which the EU was all but offering Scotland in the days following the Brexit referendum.

Breeks says:
12 June, 2018 at 4:22 pm
Can somebody explain to me how Scotland actually gets a Soft Brexit Deal to stay in the Single Market? By what mechanism do we secure this?
—————

there isnt one, thats the point, it is snp cakism, but campaigning for sscotland(and the uk) to stay in the sm/cu in a ge in oct will be hugely popular when all lab/tories can offer is wto and hard brexit.
once the election is over, we ask wm to deliver, if they refuse or cant, then we launch indyref2

Breeks as much as i feel your frustration lets be honest, Nothing Scotland says or does will change what westminster is going to do….you and i know that….this is a game unfortunately that for the public at large we have to go through…..crap i know.

Nicola has to be seen as a competent leader and the SNP is able to look after ALL of us in Scotland, hang on in there..i know we in the “bubble” are champin at the bit to go but we need previous no’s on our side for indy2.

Corbyn doesn’t want to remain in the CU. He wants a bespoke Customs Union. With FaRage wanting a Norway deal, this means the Labstainers are now more euro sceptic than UKIP!
Brexshit truly is the gift that keeps on giving.

You miss my point. Why fight for EFTA, when you require sovereignty to secure it? Why not go for the status quo of EU Membership with a bespoke deal specific to Scotland’s unique constitutional circumstance?

Our standards are compliant, our procedures and protocols are compliant. It’s virtually business as usual, no new contracts or quotas to be negotiated from scratch, just the administration of Scotland’s contribution, and number of MEPS to be sorted out, and transitional holding pen status for Scotland while we extricate ourselves from the UK, – an EU holding pen status which will maintain the protection of Scotland’s interests through the full compliment of EU Trade agreements with 3rd Countries. That’s something worthwhile which EFTA isn’t going to deliver.

EFTA is the new deal requiring Virgin negotiations. EU membership is merely adapting and filling in the blanks in a deal that already exists,

You miss my point. Why fight for EFTA, when you require sovereignty to secure it? Why not go for the status quo of EU Membership with a bespoke deal specific to Scotland’s unique constitutional circumstance?

Breeks i hear you but as seen above their are some that cant even get their head around “Politics”….numbnuts in my eyes but that is where we are

breeks
we are talking about the snp position during a ge this oct. the cu/sm is the more reasonable position to take, but as i pointed out, it isnt something wm can deliver to us.
i would put eu membership in the same bracket breeks, so as a choice of 2 undeliverable options, i chose the one most likely to appeal to the greatest number of people.

it is a piece of cakism, indyref2 will be launched shortly after the oct ge

Just for the record, in that posting of yesterday I wrongly attributed the case I was paraphrasing to Peter Bell in iScot when it was actually due to George Kerevan in yesterday’s National. (I was reading both in fairly close order.) Apologies to both!

George’s point still stands, I think. Unwise to underestimate Theresa, she is smarter than many give her credit. And she may well be heading crab-wise for some kind of never-exitum, if not called an SM/CU in name. Rees-Mogg didn’t look too happy when interviewed on C4 news tonight, but was trying to put a brave face on it.

In the absence of any definite break and an obvious launch off the cliff edge, it will instead be fudge heaven. Will an EEA/EFTA offer for Scotland then provide the knock-out blow for indy? I seriously doubt it.

For those whose best try at strategy seems to be to hope that events will change a sufficient number of minds all on their own, please think again. People are notoriously unwilling to admit, even to themselves, that they made a mistake.

The best we can hope for, when we do finally decide to go all-out for indy, is that we do so at a time when the tipping point is sufficiently close for enough people. But we will still have to work almightily for it, with a clear stand-out offer. And anyway, it will certainly not be a dead-cert win either when we do.

I was going write a wee funny bit about Trump-Kim – but I thought – I can’t do it justice – nothing invented can match the reality.

– then someone mentioned “we have to learn from Trump” – and they are right – there’s a lot you can read across, in many ways – especially dealing with a universally hostile media – check how often he has them unbalanced or simply baffled, as well as raging, teeth-bared (- which his supporters love)

America is like the weather, you just have to “deal with it” – and whoever is in charge, they will represent -aggressively- some narrow oligarchic interests. There are no good guys and bad guys, just more of the same, representing the same, with slightly better or worse, public image – Obama bombed as much as Dubya ! Get it?! It didn’t matter to those being incinerated whether or not a cool, black dude or a preppy halfwit pulled the trigger.

Trump could have been an ASSET to Scottish Independence, due to his family background and business interests … but no … the virtue signalling twats of twitter want to call him a cunt and have a “protest” march when he comes over – well, sorry to rain on your little encounter group but, of all people, Trump probably gives LESS FUCKS than anyone else … it’s just blue-hairs with a lot of lattes … a feelgood grouphug, nothing more – go back to your job at the charity shop and upload to instagram … storm the bastille! … no pasaran …wot-eva

In previous posts I have tried to introduce one of my favourite words – “realpolitik” – there are game-like aspects to this independence thing – and you have to ask yourself – do I really want to win? (Some “supporters” don’t really) – and – am I making the right moves? – and while some people are earnest enough in their desire – they do not know how the game is played. Often, the right play is an indirect one, or multi-layered.

For example – there are moral idealists on the forum who won’t touch nukes – like a rabbi with bacon … but – these guys, if left to them, would never be able to negotiate the removal of trident, or would do at such a terrible cost to make it almost worthless … I, on the other hand, could get rid of Trident AS FAST AS IS HUMANLY POSSIBLE … (hint – it’s easy, reverse psychology is key)

The Rev in his recent posts – “gets it” – it’s about winning, about making the right moves, about leverage.

Trump might have really done something today … but you see how he went about it – aggressive displays – bomber overflights. exercises, carriers steaming around … the madman will START A WAR !

“I’M a CRAZY MO-FO and YOU WONT MESS WITH ME”

– it’s like something out of a rap video – but it worked. It was all a ploy.

Harold Wilson versus his own deep state is a great example of realpolitik – and the story of the foundation of Israel, a “true crime” story if ever there was one, is quite fascinating (horrifying) – winning often comes down to the right move, or making the right deal, at the right time. Nicola meeting the Euro guy the other day – that was smart – what if, or rather when, brexit is a shambles, indyref2 is called and Nicola can say “I talked to so-and-so and IF YOU WANT IT – WE ARE RIGHT BACK IN AGAIN – SAME RULES APPLY” … that could be devastating.

Someone else mentioned something about “taking the UK to court” or something over the Act of Union and the breaking of its terms and conditions … what court would that be? – the UK’s own? – are you a halfwitted masochist?! – can’t be EU since we are out soon, and can’t be the ICJ because that’s reserved for african dictators with curious ideas about cuisine … no, you end up at the UN – but only the Security Council counts, and the “defender” sits on it already … so we would need the support of .. America … which means talking to – that guy you’ve just been calling a CUNT on twitter …

Brexit as shambolic farce is good for us. Popcorn, hotdog, feet up and enjoy the squealing. The SNP have no leverage to fix, soften, alleviate or assist this thing that will happen anyway – as todays HOC pantomime proved – and despite all the theorising, I truly think there is no real plan, only chaos and ad hoc reactions – the people actually involved in it are no macchiaveliis.

When your opponent has doused himself in petrol and is furiously trying to spark matches … it is NOT wrong to hide the fire extinguisher. Just keep well away.

At some point, the dazed and confused NO voter will look to us for assistance – and we will say … okay, but you need to do this, our way, this time – there is no VOW, nothing will ever be Better Together, no pooling and sharing … you can’t “make him change” and No – you did not “provoke him” …and no, corbyn wont “fix everything with SOCIALISM” once he gets in …

With BT and Alistair Darling’s connivance various ‘memes’ infested the internet and particularly Facebook. They seemed to centre around Alex Salmond and him being ‘President for Life’ or being dressed as Kim Jong In being called ‘Our dear Leader’ The point being to conflate Independence with SNP and Alex Salmond in particular as being ALL you would get under an Independent Scotland.

Further, you would ONLY get SNP policy.

Of course, the drip, drip effect of this DID work with SOME voters but surprisingly, and to their credit, not many. The tide had turned and only unfair, and frankly illegal, interventions from the government managed to steal the result.

But, in our OWN literature, we cannot help them do this. Whilst the above graphic plays well to both SNP and (probably) Labour voters, it doesn’t play well to ANYONE else.

It’s the most common mistake there is, appealing ONLY to your own core support.

The hardline will probably NEVER be won over BUT, with the ‘Don’t Knows’ there is a chance. For them you have to show CHOICE and not simply one party’s policy.

Independence is ONLY about WHERE the seat of power is not about WHAT will happen. Scotland COULD attain Independence and then decide to vote in a Tory Government, keep Trident, the monarchy and lower taxes for the rich whilst abolishing Corporation Tax and never even PROPOSING to rejoin the EU! But that would be Scotland’s choice, or more accurately that would be SCOTLAND’S choice, not UK’s.

What we need to point out is why the LOCATION of the seat of power is important. Why that ONE, SINGLE THING matters.

We live in a strange world, one where an extremely detailed and well thought out plan for an independent country (the most detailed independence plan ever proposed)is voted down and, barely two years later, a referendum with NO plan, NO detail and NO thought wins by a majority!!

Of course factor in interference by Press Barons, extremists in the government and flat out illegality BUT the point remains. The vote is on ONE issue only, sell the reason and not the solution.

However, given all of that, without the interference the Scottish voters saw though ALL of the other things and WERE onboard, only last minute illegal intervention prevented Indy.

In a new vote we would be starting from OVER 40% (being VERY conservative) whereas in the last we started with around 20%.

Next time we’ll win, but will there even BE a next time. The unionist parties know how this will play and will do all they can to prevent such a vote. Despite Corbyn’s “It’s up to the people of Scotland” comment, he has to contend with the PLP, who don’t even represent LABOUR members…

Well said Rev! Repeat after Stu,
“Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments.” 🙂 Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments. Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments.
Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments.
Scotland is a country and countries should choose their own governments….

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.